Pressure injury prevention practices of intensive care unit nurses in Turkey: A descriptive multiple-methods qualitative study

Barriers and facilitators of adherence to evidence-based pressure injury prevention clinical practice guideline among intensive care nurses: A cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVE

To explore intensive care unit (ICU) nurses' perceptions of their adherence to pressure injury prevention clinical practice guideline and identify the perceived barriers and facilitators that influence evidence-based pressure injury prevention practices in Chinese tertiary hospitals.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY/DESIGN

This was a multi-site, quantitative, cross-sectional study. Data were collected using a self-report questionnaire with three sections: participant demographic information, adherence to pressure injury prevention clinical practice guideline, and barriers to and facilitators of pressure injury prevention clinical practice guideline implementation.

SETTING

Thirty-three adult ICUs in 16 tertiary general hospitals in 5 major cities in Liaoning Province, China.

RESULTS

In total, 473 nurses responded to the survey. The mean score for adherence to pressure injury prevention clinical practice guideline was 159.06 ± 20.65, with 65.3 % reporting good adherence. Multiple stepwise regression analysis indicated that smaller ICU size (β = -0.114, p = 0.012) and having participated in training on pressure injury prevention clinical practice guideline (β = 0.149, p = 0.001) were statistically significantly associated with better adherence. ICU nurses identified the low priority given to pressure injury prevention as the top barrier. The top three facilitators were awareness of evidence-based practice, the current documentation format for pressure injury risk/nursing interventions, and leadership support.

CONCLUSION

ICU nurses' adherence to pressure injury prevention clinical practice guideline was satisfactory, and they reported low-to-moderate barriers and moderate facilitators.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

Participating in training on pressure injury prevention clinical practice guideline was a predictor of ICU nurses' adherence. Therefore, it is highly recommended that healthcare organisations consider providing training to nurses and address the barriers identified to improve nurses' adherence to evidence-based pressure injury prevention guidelines.

Assessment of pressure injury risk in intensive care using the COMHON index: An interrater reliability study

OBJECTIVES

To assess the interrater reliability of the COMHON (level of COnciousness, Mobility, Haemodynamics, Oxygenation, Nutrition) Index pressure injury risk assessment tool.

DESIGN

Interrater reliability was tested. Twenty-five intensive care patients were each assessed by five different nurse-raters from a pool of intensive care nurses who were available on the days of assessment. In total, 25 nurses participated.

SETTING

Two general and one cardiovascular surgery intensive care units in Istanbul, Turkey.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Interrater reliability was analysed using intraclass correlations, and standard errors of measurement (SEM) were calculated for sum scores, risk level and item scores. Minimally detectable change (MDC) was also calculated for sum score. Consistency between paired raters was analysed using Pearson's Product Moment Correlation (r) for sum score and Spearman's rho (rs) for ordinal variables.

RESULTS

All assessments were completed in ≤5 min. Interrater reliability was very high [ICC (1,1) = 0.998 (95 % CI 0.996 - 0.999)] with a SEM of 0.14 and MDC of 0.39. Consistency between paired raters was strong for sum and item scores and risk levels (coefficients >0.6). All scale items showed correlations of >.3 with the sum score.

CONCLUSION

The results demonstrate near-perfect interrater reliability. Further research into the psychometric properties of the COMHON Index and its impact on preventative intervention use is warranted.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

Pressure injury risk assessment within intensive care should be setting-specific due to the unique risk factors inherent to the patient population, which are not considered by general pressure injury risk assessment tools. An intensive care-specific pressure injury risk assessment tool was tested and demonstrated high reliability between intensive care nurses. Further research is needed to understand how its use in practice affects preventative intervention implementation and, in turn, how it impacts pressure injury outcomes.

Validity and reliability of the Waterlow scale for assessing pressure injury risk in critical adult patients: A multi-centre cohort study

AIM

To evaluate the predictive validity and reliability of the Waterlow scale in critically adult hospitalised patients.

DESIGN

A multi-centre cohort study.

METHODS

This study was conducted in 72 intensive care units (ICUs) in 38 tertiary hospitals in Gansu Province, China. All adults admitted to the ICU for greater than or equal to 24 h without pressure injury (PI) on admission were screened by the Waterlow scale on admission, during ICU stay and ICU discharge from April 2021 to February 2023. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to determine a potential cut-off value for critical adult hospitalised patients. Cut-off values were then determined using Youden's index, and sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy were calculated based on these cut-off values. Test-retest reliability was used to evaluate inter-rater reliability.

RESULTS

A total of 5874 critical patients on admission were included, and 5125 of them were assessed regularly. The area under curve (AUC) was 0.623 (95% CI, 0.574-0.690), with a cut-off score of 19 showing the best balance among sensitivity of 62.7%, specificity of 57.4%, positive predictive value of 2.07% and negative predictive value of 99.08%. The test-retest reliability between the first assessment and the regular assessment was 0.447.

CONCLUSIONS

The Waterlow scale shows insufficient predictive validity and reliability in discriminating critical adults at risk of PI development. To further modify the items of the Waterlow scale, exploring specific risk factors for PI in the ICU and clarifying their impact degree was necessary. Risk predictive models or better tools are inevitable in the future.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patients or family members supported nurses with PI risk assessment, skin examination and other activities during the inquiry.

Difficulties and obstacles experienced by intensive care unit nurses during the prevention and care of pressure injuries: A qualitative study

AIM

This study aimed to examine the difficulties and obstacles experienced by nurses working in intensive care units during the prevention and care of pressure injuries (ulcers).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A descriptive phenomenological study was designed, involving 13 nurses working in the intensive care unit of a hospital in Turkey. The data were collected through face-to-face interviews. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis. The findings were reported according to the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Studies criteria.

RESULTS

Through the data analysis, an overall theme "Prevention and Care of Pressure Injuries" and three main themes, namely "Obstacles Encountered", "Impacts on The Nurses", and "Needs and Recommendations" were identified.

CONCLUSION

This study identified institution-related issues (lack of resources, managers' attitudes, etc.), as well as lack of knowledge and training prevent the effective management of pressure injuries in intensive care units. The development of pressure injuries emotionally and professionally affects nurses. The primary needs of nurses were found to be equipment and material support, personnel training, positive attitudes of institution managers, and the establishment of a wound care unit within the hospital. The following recommendations were made based on the obtained findings: practical training should be given to all intensive care unit teams based on the latest information, modern, practical, diverse, and sufficient amount of equipment for pressure injuries should be provided, personnel shortage should be eliminated, institution managers should exhibit solution-oriented attitudes toward nurses rather than accusatory approaches, and a wound care unit should be established within the hospital. This study was limited to the nurses working in the ICU of a state hospital in Turkey. Since the study was carried out in a single hospital and due to the personal characteristics of the participants, the findings cannot be generalized to all ICU nurses and healthcare institutions.

Medical device-related pressure injuries prevention practices of intensive care unit nurses: A cross-sectional study in Turkey

AIM

Medical device-related pressure injuries (MDRPIs) are becoming increasingly common across all healthcare services and age groups in terms of both incidence and severity. It is crucial for nurses to be aware that MDRPI is a potential complication of healthcare services. This study aimed to assess the preventive practices of intensive care unit (ICU) nurses in relation to MDRPIs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This cross-sectional and descriptive study was conducted with 96 nurses between March 10 and April 31, 2021. The "Nurse Information Form" and the "MDRPIs Prevention Practices Questionnaire" form were used for the data collection.

RESULTS

The overall practice scores of ICU nurses in preventing MDRPIs were 50.83 ± 12.93. Out of the participants, 57.3% (n = 55) achieved a total practice score of 51 and above out of 68 (considered an acceptable score indicating proficiency in positive practice). The items with the most negative practice levels among nurses were related to statements such as 'I apply hydrocolloid, thin foam, or a silicone-type dressing to prevent MDPRI' (2.86 ± 0.85) and 'I use the normal pressure injury staging when staging the MDRPI' (2.88 ± 0.86). No significant difference was observed between the mean scores of MDRPI prevention practices and the characteristics of ICU nurses, such as education level, years working in the unit, and years of experience in the profession (p > 0.05). Furthermore, a positive correlation was found between age and practice levels in preventing MDRPIs (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The study results indicate that the practice levels of ICU nurses in preventing MDRPIs were insufficient. We believe that regular in-service training programs, grounded in clinical practice, are necessary to enhance nurses' awareness and management of MDRPIs.

Barriers and facilitators to pressure injury prevention in hospitals: A mixed methods systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically synthesize research evidence on barriers and facilitators to pressure injury prevention in hospital settings.

METHODS

A systematic literature review of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research was undertaken using PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library. Studies that reported barriers or/and facilitators to pressure injury prevention in the acute care settings and published in English from 2008 to 2022 were included. Studies were excluded if they were conducted in residential care facilities and nursing homes, or other long-term community care settings. Two authors independently screened articles against the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Quality appraisal was conducted by two authors by using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Reported results were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework to identify the barriers and facilitators to pressure injury prevention.

RESULTS

A total of 78 studies were included. There were 65 quantitative studies, 11 qualitative studies, and two mix-methods studies. The most salient Theoretical Domains Framework domains identified in this review were "Knowledge", "Skills", "Environmental Context and Resources", "Optimism", "Social/Professional Role and Identity", and "Social influences".

CONCLUSION

The barriers and facilitators to pressure injury prevention in hospital settings identified in this systematic review were diverse, and included issues at both individual and organizational level. Healthcare organizations can address the barriers and facilitators from the influential Theoretical Domains Framework domains. Future research is required to investigate the effectiveness of behaviour change interventions that specifically target these barriers and facilitators to pressure injury prevention.

Is caring for pressure ulcers in the intensive care unit in Spain still a challenge? A qualitative study on nurses' perceptions

BACKGROUND

The incidence of pressure ulcers is an indicator of quality in intensive care units. Due to their frequency and severity, they are identified as a problem of great importance, where the well-being of patients and relatives is compromised, also generating a high healthcare cost. Nurses are primarily responsible for the care of pressure ulcers, however, the existing literature exposes a clear lack of knowledge regarding its prevention and treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the attitudes, knowledge and perceived barriers by intensive care nurses regarding pressure ulcers treatment and prevention in a critical care setting.

DESIGN

A descriptive qualitative study has been carried out through semi-structured interviews with 22 intensive care nurses from two tertiary university hospitals in Spain. The consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) guidelines were used to reinforce the methodological approach of the study.

FINDINGS

From the collected data, 4 main themes emerged: "lack of specific knowledge about pressure ulcers in intensive care", "continuity of care: the main problem to solve", "teamwork and pressure ulcers: gasping for improvement" and "Skin care as another vital sign".

CONCLUSION

Most intensive care nurses consider that they do not have sufficient knowledge regarding pressure ulcers. The nurses' attitudes are positive, however, an ineffective transmission of information and registration regarding ulcers is perceived. Regarding the treatment of pressure ulcers, the lack of continuity of care and updated knowledge/training have been the main barriers. In terms of prevention, the most mentioned barriers have been the clinical condition of the patient and the lack of personnel, despite the level of knowledge.