Perioperative Pressure Injuries: A Systematic Literature Review

Incidence and Risk Factors for Perioperative Pressure Injuries: Prospective Descriptive Study

PURPOSE

Pressure injuries can often occur in patients undergoing surgical, diagnostic, or other invasive procedures, so it is important to assess patients in the perioperative period. This study was conducted to determine the incidence and risk factors of perioperative pressure injury.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional, prospective, and descriptive study.

METHODS

This study involved 158 patients who met the study's eligibility criteria between May 2022 and July 2022. The data were collected using the Patient Information Form, Munro Scale, Braden Scale, and pressure injury staging form. The patients were monitored postoperatively or for 3 days.

FINDINGS

Pressure injury developed in 13.9% of the patients. Perioperative risk factors were age, edema, mobilization time, parenteral nutrition, blood transfusion, and glucose level, while preoperative albumin level was lower in patients with pressure injury. In the postoperative period, the risk factors were duration of mobilization and transition to oral feeding, length of intensive care unit stay, and low Braden score. In multivariate analysis, the variables that showed significance with the risk of pressure injury were postoperative Munro score and edema.

CONCLUSIONS

It is crucial to evaluate the risk factors for pressure injury in patients who have undergone surgical procedures.

Efficacy of D33 Sealed Foam in Preventing Skin Injury from Surgical Positioning: Randomized Clinical Trial

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of density-33 (D33) sealed foam in preventing skin injuries from surgical positioning. Approach: The study, reported according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials, is characterized as a randomized clinical trial, double mask, with 64 adult patients undergoing elective surgery, 35 allocated to the control group (CG), positioned on a conventional surgical table, and 29 to the experimental group (EG), positioned on a conventional surgical table overlaid with a D33 sealed foam support surface (SS) in the occipital, sacral, and heel regions. Simple randomization was carried out, as was masking of the researcher who evaluated the skin of the patient and the statistician. Data collection was carried out immediately preoperatively, intraoperatively, and postoperatively until the third day or until patient discharge. Statistical analysis included measures of association in contingency tables, χ2, and relative risk to compare the incidence of injuries between groups. Results: Skin injuries were greater in the CG, with blanchable erythema being the main injury. The use of D33 sealed foam reduced the incidence of injury in the EG by 61.2% (relative risk: 0.39; 95% confidence interval: 0.220-0.684; p < 0.001). Innovation: One of the first clinical studies to demonstrate that using a D33 sealed foam SS decreased the incidence of blanchable erythema from surgical positioning. Conclusion: D33 sealed foam was effective in preventing skin injury from surgical positioning in patients undergoing elective surgeries.

Decreasing Intraoperative Skin Damage in Prone-Position Surgeries

OBJECTIVE

To determine if subepidermal moisture (SEM) measures help detect and prevent intraoperative acquired pressure injuries (IAPIs) for prone-position surgery.

METHODS

In this clinical trial of patients (n = 39 preintervention, n = 48 intervention, 100 historical control) undergoing prone-position surgery, researchers examined the use of multidimensionally flexible silicone foam (MFSF) dressings applied preoperatively to patients' face, chest, and iliac crests. Visual skin assessments and SEM measures were obtained preoperatively, postoperatively, and daily for up to 5 days or until discharge. Electronic health record review included demographic, medical, and surgery data.

RESULTS

Of the 187 total participants, 76 (41%) were women. Participants' mean age was 61.0 ± 15.0 years, and 9.6% were Hispanic (n = 18), 9.6% were Asian (n = 18), 6.9% were Black or African American (n = 13), and 73.8% were White (n = 138). Participants had a mean Scott-Triggers IAPI risk score of 1.5 ± 1.1. Among those with no erythema preoperatively, fewer intervention participants exhibited postoperative erythema on their face and chest than did preintervention participants. Further, fewer intervention participants had SEM-defined IAPIs at all locations in comparison with preintervention participants. The MFSF dressings overcame IAPI risk factors of surgery length, skin tone, and body mass index with fewer IAPIs in intervention participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing prone-position surgeries developed fewer IAPIs, and SEM measures indicated no damage when MFSF dressings were applied to sites preoperatively. The SEM measures detected more damage than visual assessment.

Validity and Reliability Evidence of the Munro Scale for Perioperative Patients Part II: Construct Validity

Background and Purpose: The Munro Pressure Injury Risk Assessment Scale for Perioperative Patients (Munro Scale) is the first three-phase risk instrument designed specifically for perioperative patients. The purpose of this study was to establish validity and reliability evidence for the Munro Scale. This study also had a goal to reduce the data into more manageable constructs with fewer items. Methods: Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were used to test the hypothesized model for risk assessment using the Munro Scale to identify latent variables. A retrospective review of charts from 630 risk assessments was analyzed from two community acute care hospital settings. Results: The model explained 95% of the variance in the cumulative final risk level, R2 = .95, F(20, 588) = 501.88, p < .001. Six latent variables emerged in the model with a cumulative contribution rate of 56% of the variance. Similar results were obtained in studies with Chinese and Turkish translations of the Munro Scale. Conclusions: The validity and reliability evidence obtained in this study supports the implementation of the Munro Scale for clinical practice in the perioperative setting.

Risk Factors of Intraoperative Pressure Injury in Adult Patients Undergoing Neurologic Surgery

GENERAL PURPOSE

To present research investigating the incidence of and risk factors associated with intraoperative pressure injury in patients undergoing neurologic surgery at Xiangya Hospital, Central South University in China.

TARGET AUDIENCE

This continuing education activity is intended for physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and registered nurses with an interest in skin and wound care.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES/OUTCOMES

After participating in this educational activity, the participant will:1. Identify the incidence of intraoperative pressure injuries (PIs) in patients undergoing neurologic surgery at Xiangya Hospital, Central South University in China.2. Describe risk factors for intraoperative PI.3. Outline strategies to help mitigate intraoperative PI risk.

Heel skin microclimate control: Secondary analysis of a self-controlled randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

this study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy of multilayer polyurethane foam with silicone (MPF) compared to transparent polyurethane film (TPF) dressings in the control of heel skin microclimate (temperature and moisture) of hospitalized patients undergoing elective surgeries.

METHOD

the study took of a secondary analysis of a randomized self-controlled trial, involving patients undergoing elective surgical procedure of cardiac and gastrointestinal specialties in a university hospital in southern Brazil, from March 2019 to February 2020. Patients served as their own control, with their heels randomly allocated to either TPF (control) or MPF (intervention). Skin temperature was measured using a digital infrared thermometer; and moisture determined through capacitance, at the beginning and end of surgery. The study was registered in the Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials: RBR-5GKNG5.

RESULTS

significant difference in the microclimate variables were observed when the groups (intervention and control) and the timepoint of measurement (beginning and end of surgery) were compared. When assessing temperature, an increase (+3.3 °C) was observed with TPF and a decrease (-7.4 °C) was recorded with MPF. Regarding skin moisture, an increase in moisture (+14.6 AU) was recorded with TPF and a slight decrease (-0.3 AU) with MPF.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study suggest that MPF is more effective than TPF in controlling skin microclimate (temperature and moisture) in heels skin of hospitalized patients undergoing elective surgeries. However, this control should be better investigated in other studies.

Evaluation of perioperative pressure injury in adults 65 years and older: A prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Old age is an important risk factor for the formation of pressure injury (PI). The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence, risk factors, characteristics of PI and suitability of risk assessment tools for patients aged 65 years and older.

METHOD

This prospective monocentric cohort study was conducted in Turkey between September 2022 and March 2023. Data were collected from a total of 240 surgical patients aged 65 years and older using a skin assessment form and the Braden and Munro scales for PI risk assessment.

RESULTS

The patients had a mean age of 72.90 ± 5.53 years, 123 (51 %) were male, 203 (85 %) had chronic diseases, and the mean operative time was 194.83 ± 99.45 min. PI occurred in 45 patients (18.8 %). PIs were most commonly stage I and located in the coccyx region. Postoperative Munro score, postoperative Braden score, and operative time were significant in univariate analyses (p < 0.001). According to the multiple logistic regression model, a postoperative Munro score ≥26 and postoperative Braden score ≤20 were independent factors associated with increased risk of PI.

CONCLUSION

Measures to prevent PI in surgical patients should begin in the preoperative period. Age alone may not be a risk factor in geriatric surgical patients. The Munro and Braden PI risk assessment scales can be used in geriatric surgical patients, but changes in cut-off score calculations may be required and additional age-related risk factors should be evaluated.

Risk factors predicting hospital-acquired pressure injury in adult patients: An overview of reviews

BACKGROUND

Hospital-acquired pressure injuries remain a significant patient safety threat. Current well-known pressure injury risk assessment tools have many limitations and therefore do not accurately predict the risk of pressure injury development over diverse populations. A contemporary understanding of the risk factors predicting pressure injury in adult hospitalised patients will inform pressure injury prevention and future researchers considering risk assessment tool development may benefit from our summary and synthesis of risk factors.

OBJECTIVE

To summarise and synthesise systematic reviews that identify risk factors for hospital-acquired pressure injury development in adult patients.

DESIGN

An overview of systematic reviews.

METHODS

Cochrane and the Joanna Briggs Institute methodologies guided this overview. The Cochrane library, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and Embase databases were searched for relevant articles published in English from January 2008 to September 2022. Two researchers independently screened articles against the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data and assessed the quality of the included reviews using "a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews" (AMSTAR version 2). Data were categorised using an inductive approach and synthesised according to the recent pressure injury conceptual frameworks.

RESULTS

From 11 eligible reviews, 37 risk factors were categorised inductively into 14 groups of risk factors. From these, six groups were classified into two domains: four to mechanical boundary conditions and two to susceptibility and tolerance of the individual. The remaining eight groups were evident across both domains. Four main risk factors, including diabetes, length of surgery or intensive care unit stay, vasopressor use, and low haemoglobin level were synthesised. The overall quality of the included reviews was low in five studies (45 %) and critically low in six studies (55 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlighted the limitations in the methodological quality of the included reviews that may have influenced our results regarding risk factors. Current risk assessment tools and conceptual frameworks do not fully explain the complex and changing interactions amongst risk factors. This may warrant the need for more high-quality research, such as cohort studies, focussing on predicting hospital-acquired pressure injury in adult patients, to reconsider these risk factors we synthesised.

REGISTRATION

This overview was registered with the PROSPERO (CRD42022362218) on 27 September 2022.

Evaluating the Effects of a General Anesthesia and Prone Position Nursing Checklist and Training Course on Posterior Lumbar Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

While general anesthesia in the prone position is one of the most utilized surgical positions, it predisposes to multiple types of complications. Existing studies on this topic are mostly literature reviews or focus on solving one complication, which limits their clinical use.

OBJECTIVE

The aims of the study were to evaluate the effectiveness of a 22-item general anesthesia and prone position nursing checklist and specific training course at preventing complications related to general anesthesia in the prone position.

DESIGN

The study used a randomized controlled trial.

SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS

Convenience sampling was used to recruit patients who underwent general anesthesia during posterior lumbar surgery from July 2021 to December 2021 at the Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine Hospital.

METHODS

Patients involved in the study were randomly assigned to the control (standard general anesthesia and prone position care) or experimental group (general anesthesia and prone position nursing checklist combined with specific training course in addition to standard general anesthesia and prone position care). Outcomes were pressure injuries, peripheral nerve injuries, ocular complications, and length of stay (LOS). Patient satisfaction, Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NRS) and the Oswestry Disability Scale were also measured.

RESULTS

Compared with the control group, pressure injury, brachial plexus injury, and two ocular findings (foreign body sensation and blurry vision) were significantly less common in the intervention group ( P ≤ 0.01). Participants who received standard general anesthesia and prone position care had lower self-reported satisfaction than those managed with the general anesthesia and prone position nursing checklist plus specific training course ( P = 0.002). The checklist-based intervention also significantly reduced LOS ( P = 0.000) and NRS ( P = 0.000).

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention group had significant fewer general anesthesia in the prone position-related complications, improved satisfaction, reduced LOS, and lower NRS. These findings suggest that a general anesthesia and prone position nursing checklist in addition to a specific training course are beneficial to standardizing prone position nursing care during posterior lumbar surgery.

Assessment of the risk factors for intraoperative pressure injuries in patients

AIM

This study was conducted to assess the risk factors for pressure injuries in patients during surgery.

METHODS

In this descriptive cross-sectional study, the risk of pressure injuries during surgery was evaluated in 250 patients in a university hospital. Data were collected through a Patient Descriptive Information Form (PDIF) and the 3S Intraoperative Pressure Injury Risk Assessment Scale (IPIRAS).

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 44.15 ± 17.00, and 52.4% were female. In addition, it was determined that the mean 3S IPIRAS score was higher in patients who were male, were aged ≥60 years, were obese, had a chronic disease, and had low serum albumin and hemoglobin levels (p < .05). During the surgery of the patients included in the study, support surfaces were used in 67.6%, positioning aids were used in 82.4%, and 55.6% had normal skin. Patients who underwent CVS procedures for more than 6 h, did not use support surfaces during surgery, had moist skin, or used vasopressors had higher and significantly different mean 3S IPIRAS scores (p < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

According to the results, all surgical patients were at risk for pressure injury in the intraoperative period. In addition, it was found that male gender was associated with risk factors and that being aged ≥60 years, obesity, chronic disease, low serum hemoglobin and albumin levels, CVS, operations lasting more than 6 h, moist skin, vasopressor drugs, and not using support surfaces during surgery increased the risk of pressure injuries significantly.

Pressure injury prevention in the operating unit of a Swiss university hospital: a best practice implementation project

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this project was to promote best practice in pressure injury prevention for patients during the intraoperative period in the main operating unit of a Swiss tertiary hospital, through improving risk assessment, safe positioning and documentation.

INTRODUCTION

Pressure injury is a common and serious complication of surgery patients. Despite pressure injuries being mostly preventable, they are not a top priority of operating room professionals.

METHODS

A baseline audit was conducted using the JBI Practical Application of Clinical Evidence System, applying nine evidence-based criteria. The audit was followed by the implementation of multiple strategies to promote best practice in pressure injury prevention. A follow-up audit was conducted to determine the compliance with best practice recommendations.

RESULTS

The baseline audit indicated poor compliance with evidence-based practice in most audited criteria. The project team identified barriers to best practice and strategies implemented to improve practice, including tailored education, direct support in each surgery specialty, assignment of responsibilities regarding pressure injury prevention measures among the multidisciplinary team members and multiple channels of communication. Improvements in practice were observed in eight of nine criteria in the follow-up audit.

CONCLUSION

The project demonstrated important positive changes in pressure injury prevention during the intraoperative period, despite a sharp slowdown in its implementation process. Continuing education for nursing and nonnursing practitioners has been systematized. Follow-up audits will need to be conducted in the future to maintain pressure injury prevention processes, and contribute to safety of care in adult patients during the perioperative period.

Using Continuous Intraoperative Pressure Mapping to Describe Patterns of Tissue Interface Pressure

The purpose of this study was to describe patterns of intraoperative tissue interface pressure, identify the amount of time during which the pressure at four anatomical locations exceeded 32 mm Hg, and examine associations between patient- and surgery-related variables and peak tissue interface pressure. We used a pressure mapping system to measure the intraoperative tissue interface pressure of 150 patients. We implemented linear mixed-effects models to assess trends in the mean and peak tissue interface pressure. The percentage of time during which the interface pressure exceeded 32 mm Hg at the scapulae, interscapular area, and sacral area was 70%, 70%, and 90%, respectively. Body mass index, length of surgery, and intraoperative position were major predictors of increased pressure. Understanding patterns of tissue interface pressure of patients during surgery may help perioperative nurses develop strategies to attenuate pressure and protect skin integrity.

Modeling and prediction of pressure injury in hospitalized patients using artificial intelligence

BACKGROUND

Hospital-acquired pressure injuries (PIs) induce significant patient suffering, inflate healthcare costs, and increase clinical co-morbidities. PIs are mostly due to bed-immobility, sensory impairment, bed positioning, and length of hospital stay. In this study, we use electronic health records and administrative data to examine the contributing factors to PI development using artificial intelligence (AI).

METHODS

We used advanced data science techniques to first preprocess the data and then train machine learning classifiers to predict the probability of developing PIs. The AI training was based on large, incongruent, incomplete, heterogeneous, and time-varying data of hospitalized patients. Both model-based statistical methods and model-free AI strategies were used to forecast PI outcomes and determine the salient features that are highly predictive of the outcomes.

RESULTS

Our findings reveal that PI prediction by model-free techniques outperform model-based forecasts. The performance of all AI methods is improved by rebalancing the training data and by including the Braden in the model learning phase. Compared to neural networks and linear modeling, with and without rebalancing or using Braden scores, Random forest consistently generated the optimal PI forecasts.

CONCLUSIONS

AI techniques show promise to automatically identify patients at risk for hospital acquired PIs in different surgical services. Our PI prediction model provide a first generation of AI guidance to prescreen patients at risk for developing PIs.

CLINICAL IMPACT

This study provides a foundation for designing, implementing, and assessing novel interventions addressing specific healthcare needs. Specifically, this approach allows examining the impact of various dynamic, personalized, and clinical-environment effects on PI prevention for hospital patients receiving care from various surgical services.

The risk of surgery-related pressure ulcer in diabetics: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and objective

Postoperative pressure ulcers are known as the most important quality indicators of intraoperative care that create critical and costly complications during hospital care. Accordingly, this study was performed to determine the risk factor for diabetes in postoperative pressure ulcers.

Materials and methods

The present study is a systematic review of PubMed, Scopus and the Web of Science databases with using standardized keywords of the performed English language articles between Jan 2010 to Jan 2020. The articles were searched independently by two related researchers to avoid possible biases. Then, all collected articles were reviewed, and articles with inclusion criteria were evaluated using a data collection table. It should be noted that the data were analyzed using STATA software version 11.1.

Results

Overall, the results showed that 19724 patients were identified from 15 studies conducted in Asia (six), the America (four), Europe (four), and Australia (one) from 1989 to 2019. The results showed that patients with diabetes were more likely to experience surgery-related pressure ulcers than patients without diabetes (The odds ratio of 1.52; the 95% confidence interval: 1.25–1.85).

Conclusion

In general, patients with diabetes increased the risk of surgery-related pressure ulcers about 1.5 times more than others. Accordingly, the reduction of surgery-induced pressure ulcers should be more extensively considered in patients with diabetes.

What is already known about the topic?•

Diabetes as a preoperative comorbidity should be added to risk assessment instruments for perioperative pressure ulcers, which may increase the accuracy of the prediction.

•

The excess risk of pressure ulcers associated with pre-existing diabetes was significantly higher in patients undergoing surgery, specifically in patients receiving cardiac surgery.

What this paper adds.•

Diabetes increases the risk of surgery-related pressure ulcers about 1.5 times. Therefore, it is necessary to provide Planned Cares to prevent, overcome, and decrease surgery-related pressure ulcers in patients with diabetes.

•

Previous meta-analysis reported that the risk of surgery-related pressure ulcers in diabetic patients was higher than non-diabetic patients in cardiac surgeries, while evidence for this claim was not observed in this study. Considering the long duration of liver resection surgery, the risk of pressure ulcers is higher than heart surgery

•

It is advised that standard wound measuring tools will apply for measuring wounds in the next prospective studies. It is also better to evaluate pressure ulcers at a specific time after surgery toward more carefully investigate the issue.

Prevention of pressure injury in the operating room: Heels operating room pressure injury trial

The objective was to evaluate the efficacy of multi‐layered silicone foam (intervention) compared with transparent polyurethane film (control) in preventing heel pressure injuries caused by surgical positioning of individuals undergoing elective surgery. It was designed an intra‐patient, open, parallel, randomised controlled trial was conducted in a university hospital in southern Brazil, from March 2019 to February 2020, with patients undergoing elective surgeries of cardiac and gastrointestinal specialties. The patients who met the selection criteria constituted, simultaneously, a single group receiving the intervention and active control, through paired analysis of the cutaneous sites (right heel and left heel). The outcome was the occurrence of PI, within the follow‐up period was 72 hours. Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials: RBR‐5GKNG5. There was analysis of 135 patients/270 heels, with an overall incidence of 36.7%. The pressure injury incidence was significantly lower in the intervention group (26.7%), compared with the control group (P = .001); relative risk of 0.57. In the intervention group, the estimated pressure injury‐free time (survival) was 57.5 hours and in the control group, 43.9 hours. It was concluded that Multi‐layered silicone foam (intervention) is more efficacious than transparent polyurethane film (control) in the prevention of pressure injuries caused by surgical positioning of individuals undergoing elective surgery.