Validity and reliability examples plus#

Nonetheless, there is need for the determination of the validity and reliability of the RASS framework on non-adult ICU patients. Generally, of all the validity and reliability scales, RASS has a high inter-rater reliability among all adult patients in the ICU segments (Sessler, et al., 2002). RASS inter-rater reliability was also very good among patients who had received sedative interventions. Inter-rater reliability of the RASS projected a positive outcome among all the subcultures of adult patients in the ICU segments. The results of the research indicate an excellent inter-rater reliability for RASS among all of the adult ICU patients (Sessler, et al., 2002). Patients with mechanical ventilation projected a lower RASS score than their counterparts.

Validity and reliability examples plus#

Alternatively, the bedside nurses recorded a mean of -1.14 plus or minus 1.69. In phase 2 of the research, the mean RASS score collected by the nurse educator on 30 patients was -1.18 plus or minus 1.69 (Sessler, et al., 2002). Mechanically ventilated patients projected a lower RASS score compared to non-ventilated patients. This range constitutes the agitation range. The remaining 10% fell in the +1 to +3 RASS score range. 44% of the patients fell in the 0 segment of the RASS score. 43% of the tested patients fell in the range of -5 to -1on the RASS score (Sessler, et al., 2002). The RASS scores were in the range of -5 to +3. In phase 1, 958 RASS scores were collected. In the statistical analysis segment, the researchers used interclass correlation coefficient and weighted K to test for inter-rater reliability (Sessler, et al., 2002). The age, gender, clinical data, dosage, and program of administration of sedative interventions were recorded within 8 hours of the administration of RASS. In addition, the methodology also involved data collection. The nurse educators observed and recorded the RASS score. The nurses mainly tested and recorded the scores. In the subsequent evaluation, nurses conducted RASS testing on ICU patients under the administration of a regulator. The second phase involved the evaluation of inter-rater reliability implementation of the RASS framework in the hospital. The evaluation excluded patients that projected impaired hearing, impaired visual acuity, that were non-English speaking, and the ones with airborne isolation precautions (Sessler, et al., 2002). Phase one entailed the evaluation of patients from the ICU, neuroscience ICU, cardiac surgery ICU, medical respiratory ICU, and the coronary ICU. The institution is a 750-bed urban-care teaching facility under the Virginia Commonwealth University Health Systems (Sessler, et al., 2002). The research methodology was divided into two different segments, which were conducted at the Medical College of Virginia Hospitals.

The RASS framework is a sedation scoring tool that determines the efficiency of the sedations on the patient. Inadequate sedation poses a threat to the health of patients in the intensive care units. The research is a culmination of the need to determine the efficiency of the sedatives, which are given to patients. It further assesses the reliability of nurses after the administration of the RASS intervention. The research examines these metrics on the RASS on patients in adult intensive care units in hospitals. (2002) attempt to determine the reliability and validity of RASS in a broad spectrum.

The article The Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale: Validity and Reliability in Adult Intensive Care Unit PatientsВ was intended to test the validity of the Richmond-Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) instrument employed in the intensive care units. The two metrics serve to define and measure the degree of falsification and bias in research processes. It is a metric that is engaged to determine whether due processes were followed in the determination of the research results. Validity, on the other hand, assesses the accuracy of a research intervention. Reliability refers to the degree of stability and consistency that is projected by the results of a given research. Validity and reliability form the major component in research articles.