Predictive Validity of the Braden Scale for Pressure Ulcer Risk in Critical Care: A Meta‐Analysis

Predictive validity of the braden scale for pressure injury risk assessment in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

Pressure injuries are common adverse events in clinical practice, affecting the well-being of patients and causing considerable financial burden to healthcare systems. It is therefore essential to use reliable assessment tools to identify pressure injuries for early prevention. The Braden Scale is a widely used tool to assess pressure injury risk, but the literature is currently lacking in determining its accuracy. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the Braden Scale in assessing pressure injury risk.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

Articles published between 1973-2020 from periodicals indexed in the PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were selected. Two reviewers independently selected the relevant studies for inclusion. Data were analysed by the STATA 15.0 and the RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

In total, 60 studies involving 49,326 individuals were eligible for this meta-analysis. The pooled SEN, SPE, PLR, NLR, DOR and AUC were 0.78 (95% CI: 0.74 to 0.82), 0.72 (95% CI: 0.66 to 0.78), 2.80 (95% CI: 2.30 to 3.50), 0.30 (95% CI: 0.26 to 0.35), 9.00 (95% CI: 7.00 to 13.00) and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.79 to 0.85), respectively. Subgroup analyses indicated that the AUC was higher for prospective design (0.84, 95% CI: 0.81 to 0.87), mean age <60 years (0.87, 95% CI: 0.84 to 0.90), hospital (0.82, 95% CI: 0.79 to 0.86) and Caucasian population (0.86, 95% CI: 0.82 to 0.88). In addition, 18 was found to be the optimal cut-off value.

CONCLUSION

The evidence indicated that the Braden Scale had a moderate predictive validity. It was more suitable for mean age <60 years, hospitalized patients and the Caucasian population, and the cut-off value of 18 might be used for the risk assessment of pressure injuries in clinical practice. However, due to the different cut-off values used among included studies, the results had a significant heterogeneity. Future studies should explore the optimal cut-off value in the same clinical environment.

Convergent Validity of Three Pressure Injury Risk Assessment Scales: Comparing the PPRA-Home (Pressure Injury Primary Risk Assessment Scale for Home Care) to Two Traditional Scales

Purpose

The Pressure Injury Primary Risk Assessment Scale for Home Care (PPRA-Home) was developed to predict pressure injury risk in geriatric individuals requiring long-term care in home settings. This study aimed to compare the convergent validity of the PPRA-Home to that of the two other standardized pressure injury prevention scales: the Braden and Ohura-Hotta (OH) scales.

Methods

A multicenter, cross-sectional study was conducted with 34 home-based geriatric support service providers located in five Japanese districts. The study included 69 participants (30 had a pressure injury and 39 did not) who were at classified at care levels of 1 through 5 under Japan’s long-term care insurance system. Care managers served as assessors for the PPRA-Home, while physicians or certified expert nurses served as assessors for the Braden and OH scales. Convergent validity was investigated by examining correlation coefficients between total scores on the PPRA-Home and the other two scales. Receiver operating curve analysis was used to quantify each scale’s accuracy for the two groups: those with and without a pressure injury.

Results

The PPRA-Home was found to be negatively correlated with the Braden scale (r=−0.79, p<0.05), and positively correlated with the OH scale (r=0.58, p<0.05). The area under the curve (AUC) for the PPRA-Home, Braden scale, and OH scale were 0.737, 0.814, and 0.794, respectively. A PPRA-Home cutoff score of 4 had a sensitivity of 63.3% and specificity of 81.6%.

Conclusion

The AUC for the PPRA-Home as scored by care managers was similar to those of the Braden and OH scales as scored by physicians or expert nurses. More research on the PPRA-Home’s content and predictive validity is required.

The relationship between obesity and nursing care problems in intensive care patients in Austria

OBJECTIVES

To describe the characteristics and nursing care problems of intensive care patients in Austria stratified by obesity.

BACKGROUND

Obese people in intensive care units (ICUs) present nurses with special challenges. Therefore, nurses need to receive education and training regarding how to treat obese patients to provide them with the best care. Most studies on obesity in ICU patients have not specifically addressed the problems and challenges from the nurses' perspective. This may be because nursing science programmes in Europe rarely introduce the topic of obesity.

DESIGN

This was a secondary data analysis of a longitudinal study.

METHODOLOGY

The "Nursing Quality Measurement 2.0" is the Austrian version of the "International Prevalence Measurement of Care problems". It is an annual cross-sectional study, which has been carried out since 2009. Data from all ICU patients for 2009 to 2018 were extracted and combined into one file (n = 460). The main outcome measures were obesity and various nursing care problems, including care dependency.

RESULTS

Of the ICU patients. 25% were obese. Obese ICU patients suffered significantly more often from diabetes mellitus and endocrine, nutritional, or metabolic diseases than non-obese patients. About 30% of the ICU patients were totally care dependent, and 85.6% of the ICU patients were at risk of developing pressure ulcers, whereas the risk was higher for non-obese than obese patients. ICU patients with a risk of pressure ulcer (measured with the Braden Scale) had a reduced risk of being obese (OR = 0.544).

CONCLUSION

Overall, the prevalence of nursing care problems found in this study was high. No significant differences in the prevalence of nursing care problems between obese and non-obese patients were found. However, because of the increase in the number of obese patients in all nursing settings, a stronger focus on obesity research in the area of nursing science is recommended.

Prognostic Value of Braden Scale in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction: From the Retrospective Multicenter Study for Early Evaluation of Acute Chest Pain

BACKGROUND

The Braden Scale (BS) is a routine nursing measure used to predict pressure ulcer events; it is recommended as a frailty identification instrument.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to evaluate the predictive utility of the BS in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

METHODS

We enrolled 2285 patients with AMI from the Retrospective Multicenter Study for Early Evaluation of Acute Chest Pain. The patients were divided into 3 groups (B1, B2, and B3) according to their BS score (≤12 vs 13-14 vs ≥15). The primary endpoint was all-cause death.

RESULTS

There were 264 (12.0%) all-cause deaths during the median follow-up period of 10.5 (7.9-14.2) months. In-hospital and midterm mortality and other adverse outcomes increased with decreases in the BS score. The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that patients with a lower BS score had a lower cumulative survival rate (P < .001). The multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that a decreased BS score was an independent predictor for all-cause mortality (B2 vs B1: hazard ratio, 0.610; 95% confidence interval, 0.440-0.846; P = .003; B3 vs B1: hazard ratio, 0.345; 95% confidence interval, 0.241-0.493; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The BS at admission may be a useful routine nursing measure to evaluate the prognosis of patients with AMI. The BS may be used to stratify risk at early stages and to identify those who may benefit from further assessment and intervention due to frailty syndrome.