Mandated Quality of Care Metrics for Medicare Patients: Examining New or Worsened Pressure Ulcers and Rehabilitation Outcomes in United States Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities

Early Identification, Intervention, and Prevention of Hospital-Acquired Pressure Injuries Using a Nurse-Driven Pressure Injury Prevention Program

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this quality improvement project was to reduce the hospital-acquired pressure injury (HAPI) rate to less than 1.177 per 1000 patient-days, increase staff competency and care in pressure injury prevention best practices through implementation of a nurse-driven pressure injury prevention program, to engage patients in pressure injury prevention through implementation of skin rounds, and improve staff adherence to documentation requirements for pressure injury interventions on an amputee/stroke unit.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT/PROGRAM

HAPIs can lead to negative patient outcomes including pain, infection, extended hospitalization, and morbidity. Using an evidence-based education strategy, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality pressure ulcer prevention clinical pathway and skin rounds were implemented. Focused education for nursing, staff competency, daily audits, HAPI rates, and documentation compliance were evaluated pre and post intervention.

OUTCOMES

The HAPI rate reduced from 1.177 to 0.272 per 1000 patient-days. After completion, the unit maintained zero pressure injuries, daily patient care for pressure injuries improved, documentation compliance increased, and staffs' knowledge and skill set in early identification, intervention, and prevention of pressure injuries heightened.

CONCLUSION

A nurse-driven pressure injury prevention program was successful in the reduction of the HAPI rate.

Using Pressure Mapping to Compare Efficacy of Patient Bed Positioning Devices in Participants Who Are Able-Bodied and Those with Tetraplegia

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of four positioning aids in able-bodied participants and those with tetraplegia, to determine (1) if devices differed with regard to pressure reduction and (2) if results differed for able-bodied participants versus those with tetraplegia.

METHODS

Forty volunteers (20 able-bodied and 20 with tetraplegia) participated. The variable of interest was reduction in mean pressure in the sacral region, measured in mm Hg. Testing was conducted in a hospital bed using a tissue-interface pressure-mapping system. Four bed positioning devices were examined in use at both 0° and 30° head-of-bed elevations: standard hospital pillows, fluidized positioners, foam wedge positioners, and polystyrene bead wedge positioners.

RESULTS

No between-group differences were found for participant type (able-bodied vs tetraplegic). However, the positioning devices tested did differ significantly in pressure reduction. Foam wedge positioners, polystyrene bead wedge positioners, and fluidized positioners all resulted in greater reduction in pressure over an area inclusive of the sacrum, ischia, and buttocks when compared with standard hospital pillows, with foam wedges performing best.

CONCLUSIONS

Better pressure reduction over the sacrum, buttocks, and ischia can be achieved when using devices specifically designed for patient positioning in bed as opposed to using standard hospital pillows. Data were not significantly different between able-bodied participants and participants with tetraplegia. Thus, pressure-mapping data examining the efficacy of bed-positioning devices using convenience sampling of able-bodied individuals can likely be generalized to apply to a population with tetraplegia as well.

Surveillance for Pressure Injuries on Admission to Inpatient Rehabilitation Hospitals During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Objective

To determine if the incidence of pressure injuries (PIs) on admission to an inpatient rehabilitation hospital (IRH) system of care was increased during the early coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic period.

Design

Retrospective survey chart review of consecutive cohorts. Admissions to 4 acute IRHs within 1 system of care over the first consecutive 6-week period of admitting patients positive for COVID-19 during the initial peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, April 1-May 9, 2020. A comparison was made with the pre–COVID-19 period, January 1-February 19, 2020.

Setting

Four acute IRHs with admissions on a referral basis from acute care hospitals.

Participants

A consecutive sample (N=1125) of pre–COVID-19 admissions (n=768) and COVID-19 period admissions (n=357), including persons who were COVID-19–positive (n=161) and COVID-19–negative (n=196).

Main Outcome Measures

Incidence of PIs on admission to IRH.

Results

Prevalence of PIs on admission during the COVID-19 pandemic was increased when compared with the pre–COVID-19 period by 14.9% (P<.001). There was no difference in the prevalence of PIs in the COVID-19 period between patients who were COVID-19–positive and COVID-19–negative (35.4% vs 35.7%). The severity of PIs, measured by the wound stage of the most severe PI the patient presented with, worsened during the COVID-19 period compared with pre–COVID-19 (χ² 32.04%, P<.001). The length of stay in the acute care hospital before transfer to the IRH during COVID-19 was greater than pre–COVID-19 by 10.9% (P<.001).

Conclusions

During the early part of the COVID-19 pandemic time frame, there was an increase in the prevalence and severity of PIs noted on admission to our IRHs. This may represent the significant burden placed on the health care system by the pandemic, affecting all patients regardless of COVID-19 status. This information is important to help all facilities remain vigilant to prevent PIs as the pandemic continues and potential future pandemics that place strain on medical resources.

Determining Pressure Injury Risk on Admission to Inpatient Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation: A Comparison of the FIM, Spinal Cord Injury Pressure Ulcer Scale, and Braden Scale

OBJECTIVE

Assess the utility of the admission Spinal Cord Injury Pressure Ulcer Scale (SCIPUS), Braden Scale, and the FIM for identifying individuals at risk for developing pressure injury during inpatient spinal cord injury (SCI) rehabilitation.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

Two tertiary rehabilitation centers.

PARTICIPANTS

Individuals (N=754) participating in inpatient SCI rehabilitation.

INTERVENTIONS

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the utility of the SCIPUS, Braden Scale, and FIM for identifying individuals at risk for developing pressure injury (PI) during inpatient SCI rehabilitation. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, false negative rate, odds ratio, likelihood ratio, and area under the curve (AUC) are reported.

RESULTS

The SCIPUS total score and its individual items did not demonstrate acceptable accuracy (AUC≥0.7) whereas the Braden Scale (0.73) and the FIM score (0.74) did. Once items were dichotomized into high and low risk categories, 1 Braden item (friction and shear), 5 FIM items (bathing, toileting, bed/chair transfer, tub/shower transfer, toilet transfer), the FIM transfers subscale, FIM Motor subscale, and the FIM instrument as a whole, maintained AUCs ≥0.7 and negative predictive values ≥0.95. The FIM bed/chair transfer score demonstrated the highest likelihood ratio (2.62) and overall was the most promising measure for determining PI risk.

CONCLUSION

Study findings suggest that a simple measure of mobility, admission FIM bed/chair transfer score of 1 (total assist), can identify at-risk individuals with greater accuracy than both an SCI specific instrument (SCIPUS) and a PI specific instrument (Braden). The FIM bed/chair transfer score can be readily determined at rehabilitation admission with minimal administrative and clinical burden.