The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Motor Activity Assessment Scale: A valid and reliable sedation scale for use with mechanically ventilated patients in an adult surgical intensive care unit
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To establish the validity and reliability of a new sedation scale, the Motor Activity Assessment Scale (MAAS). DESIGN: Prospective, psychometric evaluation. SETTING: Sixteen-bed surgical intensive care unit (SICU) of a 937-bed tertiary care, university-affiliated teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Twenty-five randomly selected, adult, mechanically ventilated, nonneurosurgical patients who were admitted to the SICU > or = 12 hrs after surgery and were not receiving neuromuscular blockers. INTERVENTION: Four hundred assessments (eight per patient) were completed consecutively but independently, in pairs, at standardized times (both day and night) by two nurses who were preselected for each assessment from a pool of 32 pretrained SICU nurses. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: To estimate validity, paired assessments (four/patient) compared the MAAS result with the subjective assessment using a 10-cm visual analog sedation scale, the percent change in blood pressure and heart rate from the previous 4-hr baselines, and the number of recent agitation-related sequelae. To estimate reliability, paired assessments (four/patient) measured correlation between assessments of the same type (e.g., MAAS-MAAS). Generalized estimating equations, which accounted for the four repeated measures in each patient, supported MAAS validity by finding a linear trend between MAAS and the visual analog scale (p < .001), blood pressure (p < .001), heart rate (p < .001), and agitation-related sequelae (p < .001) end points. The MAAS (kappa = 0.83 [95% confidence interval, 0.72 to 0.94]) was found to be more reliable than subjective assessment using the visual analog scale (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.32 [95% confidence interval, 0.05 to 0.55]). CONCLUSIONS: The MAAS is a valid and reliable sedation scale for use with mechanically ventilated patients in the SICU. Further studies are warranted regarding the effect of MAAS implementation in our SICU on patient outcomes, such as quality of sedation and length of mechanical ventilation, as well as the use of the MAAS in other patient populations (e.g., medical).
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“This discrepancy may reflect differences in study design, case-mix population (for example, medicosurgical patients versus medical patients), screening instrument (SAS versus Motor Activity Assessment Scale [29]), and local sedation protocols.”
From Nicotine withdrawal and agitation in ventilated critically ill patients (2010) · cites this paper as [29]
Citations
Cites
The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2529310 · Cited by 81,148
Longitudinal data analysis using generalized linear models
LIANG, K.-Y., & ZEGER, S. L. (1986) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/73.1.13 · Cited by 18,550
Controlled Sedation with Alphaxalone-Alphadolone
Ramsay, M. A. E., Savege, T. M., Simpson, B. R. J., & Goodwin, R. (1974) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.2.5920.656 · Cited by 2,860
Validity and Reliability of the Observer??s
CHERNIK, D. A., Gillings, D. B., LAINE, H., Hendler, J., Silver, J., DAVIDSON, A. B., Schwam, E. M., & Siegel, J. L. (1990) · Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1097/00004714-199008000-00003 · Cited by 1,246
Estimation of the reliability of ratings.
Ebel, R. L. (1951) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02288803 · Cited by 976
Propofol vs Midazolam in Short-, Medium-, and Long-term Sedation of Critically III Patients
Carrasco, G., Molina, R., Costa, J., Soler, J. M., & Cabré, L. (1993) · CHEST Journal · doi:10.1378/chest.103.2.557 · Cited by 250
Hansen-Flaschen, J., Cowen, J., & Polomano, R. C. (1994) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/00003246-199405000-00004 · Cited by 181
Kress, J. P., O’Connor, M. F., Pohlman, A. S., Olson, D., Lavoie, A., Toledano, A. Y., & Hall, J. B. (1996) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/ajrccm.153.3.8630539 · Cited by 178
Comparison of propofol and midazolam for sedation in intensive care unit patients
Ronan, K. P., Gallagher, T. J., George, B., & Hamby, B. (1995) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/00003246-199502000-00014 · Cited by 172
Optimal sedation of mechanically ventilated pediatric critical care patients
Marx, C. M., Smith, P. G., Lowrie, L. H., Hamlett, K. W., Ambuel, B., Yamashita, T. S., & Blumer, J. L. (1994) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/00003246-199401000-00029 · Cited by 149
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Armstrong, 1994, New Horiz, 2, 85
- Huskisson, 1982, J Rheumatol, 9, 768
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock
Dellinger, R. P., Levy, M. M., Rhodes, A., Annane, D., Gerlach, H., Opal, S. M., Sevransky, J. E., Sprung, C. L., Douglas, I. S., Jaeschke, R., et al. (2013) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/ccm.0b013e31827e83af · Cited by 9,694
Dellinger, R. P., Levy, M. M., Rhodes, A., Annane, D., Gerlach, H., Opal, S. M., Sevransky, J., Sprung, C. L., Douglas, I. S., Jaeschke, R., et al. (2013) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-012-2769-8 · Cited by 7,371
Dellinger, R. P., Levy, M. M., Carlet, J. M., Bion, J., Parker, M. M., Jaeschke, R., Reinhart, K., Angus, D. C., Brun‐Buisson, C., Beale, R. J., et al. (2007) · Intensive Care Medicine · doi:10.1007/s00134-007-0934-2 · Cited by 6,789
Barr, J., Fraser, G. L., Puntillo, K., Ely, E. W., Gélinas, C., Dasta, J. F., Davidson, J. E., Devlin, J. W., Kress, J. P., Joffe, A. M., et al. (2012) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/ccm.0b013e3182783b72 · Cited by 3,896
Self-citationSessler, C. N., Gosnell, M. S., Grap, M. J., Brophy, G. M., O'Neal, P. V., Keane, K. A., Tesoro, E. P., & Elswick, R. K. (2002) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/rccm.2107138 · Cited by 3,695
Metadata
- Authors
- Devlin, J. W., Boleski, G., Mlynarek, M., Nerenz, D. R., Peterson, E., Jankowski, M., Horst, H. M., & Zarowitz, B. J.
- Affiliations
- Henry Ford Health (US)
- Venue
- Critical Care Medicine
- Published
- 1999-07
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1271-1275
- ISSN
- 0090-3493 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2012479097
- Cited by
- 328
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 25
- FWCI
- 12.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Critical Care Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Anesthesia and Sedative Agents
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Intensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Nausea and vomiting management
- Keywords
- sedation assessment, mechanical ventilation, surgical intensive care unit, postoperative sedation, agitation, visual analogue scale
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Female, Humans, Hypnotics and Sedatives, Intensive Care Units, Male, Middle Aged, Postoperative Care, Psychometrics, Psychomotor Agitation, Respiration, Artificial, Reproducibility of Results, Linear Models, Drug Monitoring
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
