Comparison of outcome predictions made by physicians, by nurses, and by using the Mortality Prediction Model

Author:

Copeland-Fields L,Griffin T,Jenkins T,Buckley M,Wise LC

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Critical care nurses must collaborate with physicians, patients, and patients' families when making decisions about aggressiveness of care. However, few studies address nurses' ability to predict outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To compare predictions of survival outcomes made by nurses, by physicians, and by using the Mortality Prediction Model. METHODS: Predictions of survival and function and attitudes toward aggressiveness of care based on the predictions were recorded on questionnaires in the emergency department by emergency and intensive care unit physicians and by intensive care unit nurses at the time of admission to the unit between February and September 1995 for 235 consecutive adult nontrauma patients. Scores on the Mortality Prediction Model were calculated on admission. Data on 85 of the 235 patients were analyzed by using descriptive, chi 2, and correlational statistics. Nurses' predictions of function were compared with patients' actual outcomes 6 months after admission. RESULTS: Nurses' predictions of survival were comparable to those of emergency physicians and superior to those obtained by using the objective tool. Years of nursing experience had no relationship to attitudes toward aggressiveness of care. Nurses accurately predicted functional outcomes in 52% of the followed-up cases. Intensive care physicians were more accurate than nurses and emergency physicians in predicting survival. All predictions made by clinicians were superior to those obtained by using the model. CONCLUSIONS: Nurses can predict survival outcomes as accurately as physicians do. Greater sensitivity and specificity are necessary before clinical judgment or predictive tools can be considered as screens for determining aggressiveness of care.

Publisher

AACN Publishing

Subject

Critical Care Nursing,General Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3