AJCC
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Respond to This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hogg, L.
Right arrow Articles by Arroliga, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Hogg, L.
Right arrow Articles by Arroliga, A.
American Journal of Critical Care, Vol 10, Issue 2, 79-83
Copyright © 2001 by American Association of Critical Care Nurses


Articles

Interrater reliability of 2 sedation scales in a medical intensive care unit: a preliminary report

LH Hogg, MB Bobek, LC Mion, BM Legere, S Banjac, K VanKerkhove, and AC Arroliga .

BACKGROUND: Critical care nurses must assess the effectiveness of sedatives and analgesic agents in order to titrate doses. OBJECTIVES: To measure the interrater reliability of 2 sedation scales used to assess patients in medical intensive care units. METHODS: The interrater reliabilities of the Motor Activity Assessment Scale and the Luer sedation scale were compared prospectively in 31 patients receiving mechanical ventilation in an 18-bed medical intensive care unit of a tertiary care institution. Three registered nurses, 1 clinical pharmacist, and 1 physician simultaneously and independently followed a standardized procedure to rate each patient by using the 2 scales. Scales were randomly ordered to counteract ordering effect. Analysis of variance with post hoc Duncan multiple range tests was used to detect bias; a correlation coefficient matrix was used to examine degree of association among raters; and the intraclass correlation coefficient was measured to control for multiple raters. RESULTS: No significant bias was detected with either scale. The Motor Activity Assessment Scale had less variation (Pearson r = 0.75-0.92) than did the Luer scale (Pearson r = 0.37-0.94) and had a stronger intraclass correlation coefficient (0.81 vs 0.79). CONCLUSIONS: The Motor Activity Assessment Scale showed the highest consistency among raters.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2001 by the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses.