Abstract
This study examined the clinical usability of two automated risk assessment systems-the Automated Fall Risk Assessment System and Automated Pressure Injury Risk Assessment System. The clinical usability of automated assessment systems was tested in three ways: agreement between the scales that nurses generally use and the automated assessment systems, focus group interviews, and the predicted amount of time saved for risk assessment and documentation. For the analysis of agreement, 1160 patients and 1000 patients were selected for falls and pressure injuries, respectively. A total of 60 nurses participated in focus group interviews. The nurses personally checked the time taken to assess and document the risks of falls and pressure injury for 271 and 251 patient cases, respectively. The results for the agreement showed a [kappa] index of 0.43 and a percentage of agreement of 71.55% between the Automated Fall Risk Assessment System and the Johns Hopkins Fall Risk Assessment Tool. For the agreement between the Automated Pressure Injury Risk Assessment System and the Braden scale, the [kappa] index was 0.52 and the percentage of agreement was 80.60%. The focus group interviews showed that participants largely perceived the automated risk assessment systems positively. The time it took for assessment and documentation were about 5 minutes to administer the Johns Hopkins Fall Risk Assessment Tool and 2 to 3 minutes to administer the Braden scale per day to all patients. Overall, the automated risk assessment systems may help in obtaining time devoted to directly preventing falls and pressure injuries and thereby contribute to better quality care.