Psychometric testing and evaluation of user acceptance of an automatic lateral turning device for the prevention of pressure ulcers

Development and evaluation of a new assistive device for low back load reduction in caregivers: an experimental study

Low back pain among healthcare professionals is associated with the manual handling of patients. Some bed features for turning and repositioning have been developed; however, the load during patient care remains heavy. We developed a device to reduce low back load in caregivers during patient bedside care and evaluated it objectively and subjectively from a caregiver's perspective using a randomised crossover study. Overall, 28 clinical nurses and care workers were randomly assigned to two interventional groups: administering care with (Device method) and without (Manual method) the device in an experimental room. We measured the caregiver's trunk flexion angle using inertial measurement units and video recording during care and then defined a trunk flexion angle of > 45° as the threshold; the variables were analysed using linear mixed models. Subsequently, participants responded to a survey regarding the usability of the device. Trunk flexion time and percentage of time were 26.5 s (95% confidence interval: 14.1 s, 38.9 s) (p < 0.001) and 23.0% (95% confidence interval: 16.4%, 29.6%) (p < 0.001) lower, respectively, in the Device group than in the Manual group. Furthermore, caregivers evaluated the care they could administer with the device as being better than that associated with manual care.

Repositioning mattress: how a lateral tilt position reshapes the prevention of pressure ulcers in bedridden patients

Pressure ulcers have been part of tissue damage without effectiveness in medical, surgical, and intensive care units. This study aims to focus on developing lateral tilt positions for effective pressure ulcer relief for bedridden patients. A repositioning mattress was placed in the side-lying left lateral tilt position (15°, 30°, 45°), sheering (0.680, 1.323, 1.870), interface pressure (2.550, 2.290, 2.830), and placed at 1.5 m long piece of polyethylene rubber. The design strength was set at 6000 N and 2100 mm x 1105 mm (σt,0,d = 42, σc,0,d = 34). The design shows the greatest supine position at 30°, 1.323, 2.290, pressure load (Δp0 = 1.125 (1820) ≈ 2050 psi, Δp3000 = 1.125 (620) ≈ 700 psi), tensile stress (σt,0,d (MPa) = 42), compressive stress (σc,0,d (MPa) = 34), and FOS (σt,0,d = 42, σc,0,d = 34). The factor of safety illustrated that the 30° lateral tilt position is more consistent in repositioning for pressure ulcer prevention compared to the supine-to-tilt region. Further, an application of repositioning mattresses was developed to test in bedridden patients with tissue ulcers in nursing homes.

Pressure injury prevention practices among medical surgical nurses in a tertiary hospital: An observational and chart audit study

Pressure injuries are frequently occurring adverse events in hospitals, negatively impacting patient safety and quality of care. Most pressure injuries are avoidable if effective prevention strategies are used. However, the extent to which various settings influence their use of prevention strategies is unknown. The aim of this study was to describe and compare pressure injury prevention strategies used by medical and surgical nurses in the Chinese context. In this observational study, we used semi-structured observations with chart audits to collect data in two medical and two surgical wards in a tertiary hospital from June to December 2020. Observations were patient-focused; any prevention practices the patient received were recorded, and a chart audit was used to identify documented prevention strategies. The frequency of each prevention strategy was reported, and differences between medical and surgical wards were analysed using independent t-test or χ² test. A total of 577 patients (n = 294, 50.9% medical; n = 283, 49.1% surgical) were observed and their charts audited. Risk assessment was completed on admission for all patients. Repositioning was the most frequently used strategy, with about 84% (n = 486) patients being repositioned regularly. However, skin care, nutritional risk screening and the use of support surfaces were suboptimal. Patient education was not commonly observed but was documented in 75% (n = 433) of audited charts. More medical patients' skin was kept clean and hydrated, but more surgical patients received barrier creams, had a support surface and received more nutrition support and if a prone position was used, they were more likely to be turned after 2 hr and to be repositioned after sitting in a chair for an hour. Prevention strategies were more likely to be documented in surgical patients' charts. Despite pressure injury prevention guideline recommendations provided various prevention strategies for nurses to apply, the observed use of some strategies such as nutrition, skin care and support surfaces was not ideal. Nurses relied heavily on repositioning for pressure injury prevention. Most pressure injury prevention practices need improvement although surgical patients generally received better preventative care. These findings can facilitate clinicians and nurse managers when tailoring future pressure injury prevention work.