Evidence-based practices in pressure ulcer prevention: Lost in implementation?

Prevalence and associations of xerosis cutis, incontinence-associated dermatitis, skin tears, pressure ulcers, and intertrigo in aged nursing home residents: A representative prevalence study

BACKGROUND

The number of elderly and care-dependent people is increasing, leading to increased risks of adverse skin conditions. Skin care, including prevention and treatment of vulnerable skin, is an essential part of daily nursing practice in long-term residential settings. For many years, the research focus has been on individual skin problems including xerosis cutis, incontinence-associated dermatitis, skin tears, pressure ulcers, and intertrigo, although people may be affected by several at the same time.

OBJECTIVES

Aim of the present study was to describe the prevalence and associations of skin conditions relevant to nursing practice in aged nursing home residents.

DESIGN

Analysis of baseline data of a cluster-RCT in long-term residential settings.

SETTING

The study was conducted in a representative sample of n = 17 nursing homes in the federal state of Berlin, Germany.

PARTICIPANTS

Care dependent nursing home residents being 65+ years.

METHODS

A random sample of all eligible nursing homes was drawn. Demographic and health characteristics were collected and head-to-toe skin examinations conducted by dermatologists. Prevalence estimates and intracluster correlation coefficients were calculated, and group comparisons conducted.

RESULTS

Three hundred fourteen residents with a mean age of 85.4 (SD 7.1) years were included. The majority was affected by xerosis cutis (95.9%, 95% CI 93.6 to 97.8), followed by intertrigo 35.0% (95% CI 30.0 to 40.1), incontinence-associated dermatitis 21.0% (95% CI 15.6 to 26.3), skin tears 10.5% (95% CI 7.3 to 13.8), and pressure ulcers 8.0% (95% CI 5.1 to 10.8). In total, more than half of the nursing home residents were affected by two or more skin conditions at the same time. Several associations between skin conditions and mobility, care dependency, or cognitive impairment were observed. There were no associations between xerosis cutis, incontinence-associated dermatitis, skin tears, pressure ulcers or intertrigo.

CONCLUSIONS

The adverse skin and tissue conditions xerosis cutis, incontinence-associated dermatitis, skin tears, pressure ulcers and intertrigo are very common in long-term residential settings, placing a high burden on this population. Although care receivers share similar risk factors and may be affected by several skin conditions at the same time, there are no associations indicating separate aetiological pathways.

REGISTRATION

This study is registered at the German Clinical Trials Register (registration number: DRKS00015680; date of registration: January 29th, 2019) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03824886; date of registration: January 31st, 2019).

Cost-effectiveness of multi-layered silicone foam dressings for prevention of sacral and heel pressure ulcers in high-risk intensive care unit patients: An economic analysis of a randomised controlled trial

Pressure ulcer incidence is high in intensive care units. This causes a serious financial burden to healthcare systems. We evaluated the cost‐effectiveness of multi‐layered silicone foam dressings for prevention of sacral and heel pressure ulcers in addition to standard prevention in high‐risk intensive care units patients. A randomised controlled trial to assess the efficacy of multi‐layered silicone foam dressings to prevent the development of pressure ulcers on heels and sacrum among 422 intensive care unit patients was conducted. Direct costs for preventive dressings in the intervention group and costs for treatment of incident pressure ulcers in both groups were measured using a bottom‐up approach. A cost‐effectiveness analysis by calculating the incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio using different assumptions was performed. Additional dressing and labour costs of €150.81 (€116.45 heels; €34.36 sacrum) per patient occurred in the intervention group. Treatment costs were €569.49 in the control group and €134.88 in the intervention group. The incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio was €1945.30 per PU avoided (€8144.72 on heels; €701.54 sacrum) in the intervention group. We conclude that application of preventive dressings is cost‐effective for the sacral area, but only marginal on heels for critically ill patients.

The effects of peppermint gel on prevention of pressure injury in hospitalized patients with head trauma in neurosurgical ICU: A double-blind randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of peppermint gel on the prevention of pressure injuries in patients with head trauma admitted to neurosurgical intensive care units.

DESIGN

This double blind, randomized, controlled clinical trial study was conducted on 150 patients with head trauma admitted to the ICU. Using sealed envelopes, patients were assigned randomly into two intervention (n = 75) and control (n = 75) groups.

SETTING

The study was conducted in the ICUs of a university hospital and a general hospital in Shiraz, Iran.

INTERVENTION

The intervention group received peppermint gel three times a day up to 14 days during the skin care as a layer on the skin areas exposed to the risk of pressure injuries. The control group used a placebo gel.

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

The expected outcome in this study was the incidence of pressure injuries stage I, which once daily was evaluated by pairs of observers with the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel.

RESULTS

The incidence rate of pressure injuries was 22.8% and 77% in the intervention and the control groups, respectively. The chi-square test result showed a significant deference between two groups (P < 0.001). Sacrum was the most common site for incidence of the pressure injuries.

CONCLUSION

The findings showed that the peppermint gel has a positive effect in the prevention of pressure injuries in the patients with head trauma admitted to ICUs. So, the use of this gel is suggested as an easy and low-cost method for prevention of pressure injuries in the patients admitted to ICUs.

[Pressure ulcer risk assessment and preventive measures in mobile / chairfast / bedfast hospital patients]

Pressure ulcer risk assessment and preventive measures in mobile / chairfast / bedfast hospital patients Abstract. Background: Internationally, it is recommended to use the clinical view with a validated instrument for pressure ulcer risk assessment to determine subsequent measures. We could not identify any study investigating risk assessment and subsequent measures for mobile / chairfast / bedfast patients. Aim of the study: To identify the degree of agreement between the Bradenscale and clinical view regarding pressure ulcer risk in mobile / chairfast / bedfast patients and subsequent preventive measures. Method: Data from 5274 hospital patients from the "Nursing quality measurement 2015", a cross-sectional multicenter study, were collected. Results: Out of all mobile, chairfast or bedfast patients assessed as at risk of pressure ulcer with the Bradenscale, 22.3 % (mobile), 61.7 % (chairfast) and 86.1 % (bedfast) were also assessed as at risk by clinical view. More than 3 / 4 of the chairfast patients that were not at risk according to clinical view received preventive measures. Conclusion: The consequences over time for patients that received no measures due to discrepancies in the risk assessments should be focused. Furthermore the evaluation of measures in patients without a risk of pressure ulcer is of critical importance. The aspect of patient mobility deserves special attention due to the low agreement of the risk assessments in chairfast and mobile patients.

Knowledge and Attitudes of Nurses Toward Pressure Injury Prevention: A Cross-Sectional Multisite Study

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to examine the knowledge and attitudes of nurses on pressure injury prevention and determine if there was a relationship between knowledge, attitude, and years of experience following an unexplained increase in reported hospital-acquired pressure injuries across 1 health district in Sydney, Australia.

DESIGN

Multisite cross-sectional study.

SUBJECTS AND SETTING

Registered and enrolled nurses working in acute, medical, and rehabilitation units in 4 hospitals and 5 community health centers across a local health district.

METHODS

Using a modified version of the Pressure Ulcer Knowledge Test and the Staff Attitude Scale, nurses were invited to complete the survey online or on paper.

RESULTS

A total of 3123 surveys were distributed and 998 were returned yielding a response rate of 32%. Approximately one-third of nurse respondents who participated in the survey had been practicing for 5 to 10 years. Almost 80% of participants scored 33/47 or more (70% or more correct) on the knowledge survey; the mean score was 35.21. The mean score for the attitudes test was 44.43 ± 4.77, out of 55 (80.7%), indicating a positive attitude toward pressure injury prevention. There was a significant positive correlation between nurses' years of experience and attitudes, but there was no correlation between years of experience and knowledge. Knowledge and attitudes were also significantly positively correlated.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurses had sound knowledge and held positive attitudes toward pressure injury prevention. Positive attitudes were associated with greater time spent in the workforce. Additional research is required to examine relationships between knowledge of and attitude toward pressure injury prevention and clinical practice. Further research is also needed to determine if improving knowledge and attitudes results in a sustained reduction of hospital-acquired pressure injuries.

Measuring the quality of pressure ulcer prevention: A systematic mapping review of quality indicators

The aim of this study was to provide a systematic overview of available pressure ulcer prevention quality indicators and to evaluate the underlying empirical evidence. A systematic mapping review was conducted with combined searches in Embase and Medline, and websites of relevant institutions and organisations. The eligibility criteria were clear use of the term "quality indicator" regarding pressure ulcer prevention; English or German language; and all settings, populations, and types of resources, including articles, brochures, and online material. In total, n = 146 quality indicators were identified. Most indicators were published in the United States (n = 50). The majority of indicators was developed for the hospital setting (n = 102). Process indicators were the most common (n = 71), followed by outcome indicators (n = 49). Less than half of identified indicators appeared to be practically used. Evidence supporting the validity and reliability were reported for n = 25 and n = 30 indicators respectively. The high number of indicators demonstrate the importance of measuring pressure ulcer prevention quality. This is not an indicator of our ability to accurately measure and evaluate this construct. There is an urgent need to develop evidence-based and internationally comparable indicators to help improve patient care and safety worldwide.

Adherence to evidence-based pressure injury prevention guidelines in routine clinical practice: a longitudinal study

The aim of this longitudinal study was to describe adherence to evidence-based pressure injury (PI) prevention guidelines in routine clinical practice in Australian hospitals. Data were analysed from four control sites of a larger-cluster randomised trial of a PI intervention. The sample of 799 included 220 (27·5%) Not at risk, 344 (43·1%) At risk and 110 (13·8%) At high risk patients. A total of 84 (10·5%) patients developed a PI during the study: 20 (9·0% of 220) in the Not at risk group, 45 (13·1% of 344) in the At risk group, 15 (13·6% of 110) in the At high risk group and 4 (3·2% of 125) patients who did not have a risk assessment completed. Of all patients, 165 (20·7%) received only one PI prevention strategy, and 494 (61·8%) received ≥2 strategies at some point during the study period. There was no statistical difference in the proportion of time the three risk groups received ≥1 and ≥2 strategies; on average, this was less than half the time they were in the study. Thus, patients were not receiving PI prevention strategies consistently throughout their hospital stay, although it is possible patients' risk changed over the study period.

The effect of a patient centred care bundle intervention on pressure ulcer incidence (INTACT): A cluster randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Hospital-acquired pressure ulcers are a serious patient safety concern, associated with poor patient outcomes and high healthcare costs. They are also viewed as an indicator of nursing care quality.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle in preventing hospital-acquired pressure ulcers among at risk patients.

DESIGN

Pragmatic cluster randomised trial.

SETTING

Eight tertiary referral hospitals with >200 beds each in three Australian states.

PARTICIPANTS

1600 patients (200/hospital) were recruited. Patients were eligible if they were: ≥18 years old; at risk of pressure ulcer because of limited mobility; expected to stay in hospital ≥48h and able to read English.

METHODS

Hospitals (clusters) were stratified in two groups by recent pressure ulcer rates and randomised within strata to either a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle or standard care. The care bundle was theoretically and empirically based on patient participation and clinical practice guidelines. It was multi-component, with three messages for patients' participation in pressure ulcer prevention care: keep moving; look after your skin; and eat a healthy diet. Training aids for patients included a DVD, brochure and poster. Nurses in intervention hospitals were trained in partnering with patients in their pressure ulcer prevention care. The statistician, recruiters, and outcome assessors were blinded to group allocation and interventionists blinded to the study hypotheses, tested at both the cluster and patient level. The primary outcome, incidence of hospital-acquired pressure ulcers, which applied to both the cluster and individual participant level, was measured by daily skin inspection.

RESULTS

Four clusters were randomised to each group and 799 patients per group analysed. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.035. After adjusting for clustering and pre-specified covariates (age, pressure ulcer present at baseline, body mass index, reason for admission, residence and number of comorbidities on admission), the hazard ratio for new pressure ulcers developed (pressure ulcer prevention care bundle relative to standard care) was 0.58 (95% CI: 0.25, 1.33; p=0.198). No adverse events or harms were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the pressure ulcer prevention care bundle was associated with a large reduction in the hazard of ulceration, there was a high degree of uncertainty around this estimate and the difference was not statistically significant. Possible explanations for this non-significant finding include that the pressure ulcer prevention care bundle was effective but the sample size too small to detect this.

Effects of gelatin sponge combined with moist wound-healing nursing intervention in the treatment of phase III bedsore

Pressure sore pertains to tissue damage or necrosis that occurs due to lack of adequate nutrition following long-term exposure to pressure and decreased blood circulation. The aim of the study was to examine the effects of gelatin sponge combined with moist wound-healing nursing intervention in the treatment of phase III bedsore. In total, 50 patients with phase III bedsore were included in the present study. The patients were randomly divided into the control (n=25) and observation (n=25) groups. Patients in the control group received conventional nursing, while those in the observation group received gelatin sponge combined with moist wound healing nursing. The effects of the two nursing methods were compared and analyzed. The results showed that the improvement rate of the observation group was significantly higher than that of the control group (P<0.05). The Branden score and area of pressure sore of the observation group were significantly lower than those of the control group (P<0.05). The frequency and time of dressing change and the average cost of hospitalization of the observation group were significantly lower than those of the control group (P<0.001). In conclusion, gelatin sponge combined with moist wound-healing nursing intervention may significantly improve the treatment of phase III bedsore.