H. Moch Ansari Saleh 医生医院急诊室的中风加札马达(ASGM)和盖伊医院中风评分(GHSS)算法在确定中风急诊类型方面的有效性

M. Mohtar, C. E. F. Tjomiadi, Siti Jamilah, Ahmad Apriannor
{"title":"H. Moch Ansari Saleh 医生医院急诊室的中风加札马达(ASGM)和盖伊医院中风评分(GHSS)算法在确定中风急诊类型方面的有效性","authors":"M. Mohtar, C. E. F. Tjomiadi, Siti Jamilah, Ahmad Apriannor","doi":"10.22219/jk.v15i01.30676","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Good stroke management depends on the speed and accuracy of the assessment system in diagnosing the type of stroke, in order to reduce mortality and morbidity. CT scan is a tool to differentiate the type of stroke, determine the location of the lesion and determine the severity of the disease. However, this tool is expensive and not all areas have it and the procedure takes quite a long time. Nurses need a diagnostic tool in the form of a simple assessment system including the Gadjah Mada Stroke Algorithm (ASGM) and Guy's Hospital Stroke Score (GHSS) which are easy, valid, reliable assessment tools in determining the type of stroke and preventing delays. Objectives:  Analyzing the comparison of the ASGM and GHSS scoring systems in determining the type of stroke emergency in the Emergency room. Methods:  This research method is quantitative pre-experimental design (posttest only design). The population was all stroke patients in the emergency room with 30 samples and the collection technique was accidental sampling. As for the stages, each respondent undergoes an ASGM assessment which consists of 3 components and GHSS 9 components. The statistical test used is the Paired Sample T-test, then an accuracy test is carried out by looking at the level of sensitivity and specificity. Results:  Based on the results of the Paired Sample T-test, the Sig value. amounting to 0.000 <0.05, which means there is a significant difference between the ASGM and GHSS scoring systems in determining the type of emergency in stroke patients. The average difference in the duration of determining the type of emergency and nursing diagnosis in the assessment system and ASGM and GHSS is 7.6 minutes. Furthermore, it also shows lower data of 7,066 and upper data of 8,134. This shows that the duration range for determining the type of emergency using ASGM is around 7.1 – 8.1 minutes faster compared to GHSS. Based on the accuracy test, the ASGM sensitivity level is 86.66% and the specificity level is 96.66%, while the GHSS sensitivity level is 56.66% and the specificity level is 63.33%.This difference is thought to be due to ASGM having more specific assessment variables for the brain, so that detecting suspected types of stroke in the acute phase is more accurate compared to GHSS. Conclusions: The ASGM and GHSS assessment methods are effective in determining the type of emergency in stroke patients in the ERHowever, in terms of duration, determining the type of emergency and.","PeriodicalId":505071,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Keperawatan","volume":"62 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effectiveness of the algorithm Stroke Gadjah Mada’s (ASGM) and Guy's Hospital Stroke Score (GHSS) in determining the type of etroke emergency in the emergency room of Dr. H. Moch Ansari Saleh hospital\",\"authors\":\"M. Mohtar, C. E. F. Tjomiadi, Siti Jamilah, Ahmad Apriannor\",\"doi\":\"10.22219/jk.v15i01.30676\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: Good stroke management depends on the speed and accuracy of the assessment system in diagnosing the type of stroke, in order to reduce mortality and morbidity. CT scan is a tool to differentiate the type of stroke, determine the location of the lesion and determine the severity of the disease. However, this tool is expensive and not all areas have it and the procedure takes quite a long time. Nurses need a diagnostic tool in the form of a simple assessment system including the Gadjah Mada Stroke Algorithm (ASGM) and Guy's Hospital Stroke Score (GHSS) which are easy, valid, reliable assessment tools in determining the type of stroke and preventing delays. Objectives:  Analyzing the comparison of the ASGM and GHSS scoring systems in determining the type of stroke emergency in the Emergency room. Methods:  This research method is quantitative pre-experimental design (posttest only design). The population was all stroke patients in the emergency room with 30 samples and the collection technique was accidental sampling. As for the stages, each respondent undergoes an ASGM assessment which consists of 3 components and GHSS 9 components. The statistical test used is the Paired Sample T-test, then an accuracy test is carried out by looking at the level of sensitivity and specificity. Results:  Based on the results of the Paired Sample T-test, the Sig value. amounting to 0.000 <0.05, which means there is a significant difference between the ASGM and GHSS scoring systems in determining the type of emergency in stroke patients. The average difference in the duration of determining the type of emergency and nursing diagnosis in the assessment system and ASGM and GHSS is 7.6 minutes. Furthermore, it also shows lower data of 7,066 and upper data of 8,134. This shows that the duration range for determining the type of emergency using ASGM is around 7.1 – 8.1 minutes faster compared to GHSS. Based on the accuracy test, the ASGM sensitivity level is 86.66% and the specificity level is 96.66%, while the GHSS sensitivity level is 56.66% and the specificity level is 63.33%.This difference is thought to be due to ASGM having more specific assessment variables for the brain, so that detecting suspected types of stroke in the acute phase is more accurate compared to GHSS. Conclusions: The ASGM and GHSS assessment methods are effective in determining the type of emergency in stroke patients in the ERHowever, in terms of duration, determining the type of emergency and.\",\"PeriodicalId\":505071,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Jurnal Keperawatan\",\"volume\":\"62 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Jurnal Keperawatan\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22219/jk.v15i01.30676\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Keperawatan","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22219/jk.v15i01.30676","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:良好的中风管理取决于评估系统在诊断中风类型方面的速度和准确性,以降低死亡率和发病率。CT 扫描是区分中风类型、确定病灶位置和疾病严重程度的工具。然而,这种工具价格昂贵,并非所有地区都有,而且扫描过程需要很长时间。护士需要一种简单评估系统形式的诊断工具,包括 Gadjah Mada 中风算法(ASGM)和盖伊医院中风评分(GHSS),这是一种简单、有效、可靠的评估工具,可用于确定中风类型并防止延误。研究目的 分析 ASGM 和 GHSS 评分系统在确定急诊室中风急症类型方面的比较。方法: 本研究采用定量实验前设计(仅事后测试设计)。研究对象为急诊室的所有脑卒中患者,共 30 个样本,收集技术为意外抽样。在研究阶段,每位受访者都要接受 ASGM 评估(包括 3 个部分)和 GHSS 评估(包括 9 个部分)。使用的统计检验是配对样本 T 检验,然后通过观察灵敏度和特异性水平进行准确性检验。结果 根据配对样本 T 检验的结果,Sig 值为 0.000 <0.05,这意味着 ASGM 和 GHSS 评分系统在判断脑卒中患者急诊类型方面存在显著差异。评估系统与 ASGM 和 GHSS 在确定急诊类型和护理诊断方面的平均时长相差 7.6 分钟。此外,它还显示出较低数据为 7,066 分钟,较高数据为 8,134 分钟。这表明,与 GHSS 相比,使用 ASGM 确定急诊类型的时间范围约快 7.1 - 8.1 分钟。根据准确性测试,ASGM 的灵敏度水平为 86.66%,特异性水平为 96.66%,而 GHSS 的灵敏度水平为 56.66%,特异性水平为 63.33%。这种差异被认为是由于 ASGM 对大脑的评估变量更具特异性,因此与 GHSS 相比,在急性期检测疑似中风类型更为准确。结论:ASGM 和 GHSS 评估方法能有效确定急诊室脑卒中患者的急诊类型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The effectiveness of the algorithm Stroke Gadjah Mada’s (ASGM) and Guy's Hospital Stroke Score (GHSS) in determining the type of etroke emergency in the emergency room of Dr. H. Moch Ansari Saleh hospital
Introduction: Good stroke management depends on the speed and accuracy of the assessment system in diagnosing the type of stroke, in order to reduce mortality and morbidity. CT scan is a tool to differentiate the type of stroke, determine the location of the lesion and determine the severity of the disease. However, this tool is expensive and not all areas have it and the procedure takes quite a long time. Nurses need a diagnostic tool in the form of a simple assessment system including the Gadjah Mada Stroke Algorithm (ASGM) and Guy's Hospital Stroke Score (GHSS) which are easy, valid, reliable assessment tools in determining the type of stroke and preventing delays. Objectives:  Analyzing the comparison of the ASGM and GHSS scoring systems in determining the type of stroke emergency in the Emergency room. Methods:  This research method is quantitative pre-experimental design (posttest only design). The population was all stroke patients in the emergency room with 30 samples and the collection technique was accidental sampling. As for the stages, each respondent undergoes an ASGM assessment which consists of 3 components and GHSS 9 components. The statistical test used is the Paired Sample T-test, then an accuracy test is carried out by looking at the level of sensitivity and specificity. Results:  Based on the results of the Paired Sample T-test, the Sig value. amounting to 0.000 <0.05, which means there is a significant difference between the ASGM and GHSS scoring systems in determining the type of emergency in stroke patients. The average difference in the duration of determining the type of emergency and nursing diagnosis in the assessment system and ASGM and GHSS is 7.6 minutes. Furthermore, it also shows lower data of 7,066 and upper data of 8,134. This shows that the duration range for determining the type of emergency using ASGM is around 7.1 – 8.1 minutes faster compared to GHSS. Based on the accuracy test, the ASGM sensitivity level is 86.66% and the specificity level is 96.66%, while the GHSS sensitivity level is 56.66% and the specificity level is 63.33%.This difference is thought to be due to ASGM having more specific assessment variables for the brain, so that detecting suspected types of stroke in the acute phase is more accurate compared to GHSS. Conclusions: The ASGM and GHSS assessment methods are effective in determining the type of emergency in stroke patients in the ERHowever, in terms of duration, determining the type of emergency and.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信