The Use of Nurse Checklists in a Bedside Computer-Based Information System to Focus on Avoiding Secondary Insults in Neurointensive Care

Table 2

Study design outline.

Evaluation of secondary insult checklists	Measures	Study material/selections	Table or figure
Feasibility	The extent of filled in checklists	All shifts in 26 patients. 2184 assessments (ICP 546, CPP 546, SBP 546, and temperature 546).
Accuracy	(1) The proportions of Yes and No assessments in shifts with no collected minute-by-minute values out of the treatment goal	Assessed work shifts with complete monitoring data and no collected minute-by-minute values out of the treatment goal in 26 patients. 803 assessments (ICP 58, CPP 179, SBT 320, and temperature 246)
	(2) The duration in minutes spent at secondary insult level compared to how the assessment was made (Yes or No) in shifts with any value out of the treatment goal	Assessed work shifts with complete monitoring data and any value out of the treatment goal in 26 patients. 929 assessments (ICP 381, CPP 260, SBP 129, and temperature 159)	Table 3
	(3) The numbers of Yes and No assessments in relation to the proportions of GMT spent above/below the defined insult level.	Assessed work shifts with complete monitoring data in 21 patients^*. 1096 assessments (ICP 366, CPP 374, and temperature 356)	Figures  2–4
	(4) The sensitivity and specificity for the checklist assessments. A secondary insult was defined to have occurred if >5% of GMT had been spent at insult level according to the collected minute-by-minute monitoring data.	Assessed work shifts with complete monitoring data in 21 patients^*. 1096 assessments (ICP 366, CPP 374, temperature 356)	Table 4

^*5 patients had to be excluded due to technical problems analysing the monitoring files.