Preventing pressure injuries in the emergency department: Current evidence and practice considerations

Pressure injury screening in the emergency department: A concept analysis

AIM

This concept analysis analyzes pressure injury screening in the emergency department setting using Walker and Avant's approach.

BACKGROUND

Pressure injury treatment cost in the United States totals over 11 billion dollars annually. Although a pressure injury could develop in the few hours a patient is in the emergency department, there is little guidance on how an emergency department should screen, prevent, and treat patients.

DATA SOURCE

Five sources resulted from database searches of CINAHL full-text, Health Business FullTEXT, and MEDLINE with Full Text. Key search terms used to narrow the search consist of the following terminology: "pressure injury" OR "pressure ulcer" AND "screening" AND "risk factors" AND "emergency room" OR "emergency department.

REVIEW METHODS

Walker and Avant's method of concept analysis was used to clarify the concept of pressure injury screening in the emergency department.

RESULTS

The concept analysis identified two attributes of pressure injury screening in the emergency department: patient length of stay and the cost of pressure injury treatment. Antecedents identified are patient risk factors: age, mobility status, sensory perception, comorbidities, and pre-existing pressure injuries. Positive consequences identified are increased patient comfort, increased staff satisfaction, decreased hospital-acquired pressure injuries, and increased adherence to established treatment protocols.

CONCLUSIONS

This concept analysis may help to guide evidence-based practice for pressure injury screening in the emergency setting. Perhaps screening in the emergency department, if adopted globally, is the missing element needed to finally see a reduction in pressure injury rates.

The 2020 Update on Pressure Injuries: A Review of the Literature

GENERAL PURPOSE

To provide an update on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, prevention, and patient preferences for care of pressure injuries (PIs).

TARGET AUDIENCE

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

LEARNING OBJECTIVES/OUTCOMES

After participating in this continuing education activity, the participant will:1. Recognize the risks to ICU patients regarding PIs.2. Select evidence-based strategies that can help prevent PIs.3. Identify factors that can contribute to the development of PIs.4. Choose collaborative approaches when working with a patient who has a PI.

ABSTRACT

The literature on pressure injuries continues to expand at a rapid rate such that keeping current is a challenge for busy clinicians. In this article, the authors summarize six important articles related to pressure injuries published in 2020. The articles cover a range of topics including epidemiology, pathophysiology, prevention, and patient preferences for care. For each article, a description of the study results is provided along with a comment on why the results are important. This information should help clinicians incorporate these new data into their clinical practice.

Pressure Injury Prevention in Patients with Prolonged ED Stays Prior to Admission

PURPOSE

The purpose of this project was to examine whether initiating a standardized pressure injury (PI) assessment and prevention protocol early in adult patients' ED stay reduces hospital-acquired PIs (HAPIs) in those patients admitted from the ED to acute care inpatient medical units.

METHODS

A nurse-led evidence-based practice team studied the problem of increasing HAPIs on four acute care inpatient units and found that, among patients who had been admitted to inpatient care from the ED, longer ED boarding times correlated with a higher rate of HAPIs. ED staff and acute care unit nurses collaborated to develop new protocols to prevent HAPIs in the ED, including staff education and standardized assessments and prevention care for at-risk patients. Data collection was performed at three time periods over approximately two and a half years: baseline, intervention, and postintervention.

RESULTS

The incidence rate for HAPIs decreased from 3.56 per 1,000 patient-days at baseline to 1.31 per 1,000 patient-days during the intervention period. This reduction was sustained over the next five months, during which the HAPI incidence rate was 1.53 per 1,000 patient-days.

IMPLICATIONS

At a time when ED length of stay is difficult to manage and continues to increase, the use of evidence-based interventions and protocols can reduce the rate of PIs in high-risk patients waiting for hospital admission, leading to a reduction in PI rates and overall hospital costs.

Risk of pressure injury among users of emergency care units

OBJECTIVE

To identify the risk of pressure injury in patients of emergency care units.

METHOD

Descriptive, cross-sectional, and quantitative by applying the Braden scale to 377 patients from eight units in Paraná, between April and September 2016. Descriptive statistics and Spearman's correlation were used, with a significance of 0.1% for analysis.

RESULTS

There was a prevalence of risk-free patients (64.5%; n=243) and of older adults (54.6%; n=206); those at high risk for pressure injury were in the emergency department. Most of the variables were preserved, with emphasis on sensory perception (65.3%; n=246). The Spearman's correlation coefficient was at least 0.93 and indicated a strong linear relation between the results obtained in the variables and in the scale; it was verified that the risk for pressure injury increases with age.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the patients were not at risk; however, the older adults and those treated in the emergency department were at high risk of developing pressure injuries.

Hypotension at emergency department admission and hospital-acquired pressure ulcers in older patients: prospective study

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the relationship between admission hypotension and hospital acquired pressure ulcers (PU) among older patients in an emergency department.

METHODS

The study was a prospective cohort conducted between March and May 2017 in the emergency department of a tertiary care hospital in Eastern China. Data on PUs and possible PU risk factors were collected using a pre-designed form. Multivariate logistic regression was used to calculate the adjusted odds ratio (OR).

RESULTS

A total of 157 older patients were included in the study. PU incidence was 8.3%, with 95% confidence interval (CI) of 4.5 to 13.7%. The majority (76.9%) of PUs developed in the first three days of admission. On admission, 28 patients were found to be hypotensive, and 129 non-hypotensive. In the hypotensive group, PU incidence was 21.4% (6/28), and 5.4% (7/129) in the non-hypotensive group, respectively. The crude OR was 4.753 (95%CI: 1.183 to 18.086). After adjustment by patients' age, admission to emergency intensive care unit and if requiring assistance to move, the adjusted OR of hypotension on admission for PU risk was 1.755 (95%CI: 1.356 to 3.224).

CONCLUSION

Our study showed that admission hypotension was an independent risk factor of PU among elderly patients in emergency department. However, this conclusion should be confirmed by further studies with large sample size.

Preventing pressure injuries in the emergency department: Current evidence and practice considerations

The emergency department (ED) is at the front line of hospital pressure injury (PI) prevention, yet ED clinicians must balance many competing clinical priorities in the care of seriously ill patients. This paper presents the current biomechanical and clinical evidence and management considerations to assist EDs to continue to develop and implement evidence-based PI prevention protocols for the high-risk emergency/trauma patient. The prevention of hospital-acquired pressure injuries has received significant focus internationally over many years because of the additional burden that these injuries place on the patient, the additional costs and impact to the efficiency of the hospital, and the potential for litigation. The development of a PI is the result of a complex number of biomechanical, physiological, and environmental interactions. Our understanding of the interaction of these factors has improved significantly over the past 10 years. We have demonstrated that large reductions in PI incidence rates can be achieved in critical care and general hospital wards through the application of advanced evidence-based prevention protocols and believe that further improvement can be achieved through the application of these approaches in the ED.