• J Pain Symptom Manage · Nov 2012

    Palliative sedation: reliability and validity of sedation scales.

    • Jimmy J Arevalo, Tijn Brinkkemper, Agnes van der Heide, Judith A Rietjens, Miel Ribbe, Luc Deliens, Stephan A Loer, Wouter W A Zuurmond, Roberto S G M Perez, and AMROSE Site Study Group.
    • Department of Anesthesiology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
    • J Pain Symptom Manage. 2012 Nov 1;44(5):704-14.

    ContextObserver-based sedation scales have been used to provide a measurable estimate of the comfort of nonalert patients in palliative sedation. However, their usefulness and appropriateness in this setting has not been demonstrated.ObjectivesTo study the reliability and validity of observer-based sedation scales in palliative sedation.MethodsA prospective evaluation of 54 patients under intermittent or continuous sedation with four sedation scales was performed by 52 nurses. Included scales were the Minnesota Sedation Assessment Tool (MSAT), Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale (RASS), Vancouver Interaction and Calmness Scale (VICS), and a sedation score proposed in the Guideline for Palliative Sedation of the Royal Dutch Medical Association (KNMG). Inter-rater reliability was tested with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cohen's kappa coefficient. Correlations between the scales using Spearman's rho tested concurrent validity. We also examined construct, discriminative, and evaluative validity. In addition, nurses completed a user-friendliness survey.ResultsOverall moderate to high inter-rater reliability was found for the VICS interaction subscale (ICC = 0.85), RASS (ICC = 0.73), and KNMG (ICC = 0.71). The largest correlation between scales was found for the RASS and KNMG (rho = 0.836). All scales showed discriminative and evaluative validity, except for the MSAT motor subscale and VICS calmness subscale. Finally, the RASS was less time consuming, clearer, and easier to use than the MSAT and VICS.ConclusionThe RASS and KNMG scales stand as the most reliable and valid among the evaluated scales. In addition, the RASS was less time consuming, clearer, and easier to use than the MSAT and VICS. Further research is needed to evaluate the impact of the scales on better symptom control and patient comfort.Copyright © 2012 U.S. Cancer Pain Relief Committee. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…