Patients' Perceptions of a Pressure Ulcer Prevention Care Bundle in Hospital: A Qualitative Descriptive Study to Guide Evidence-Based Practice

The pressure injury prevalence and practice improvements (PIPPI) study: A multiple methods evaluation of pressure injury prevention practices in an acute-care hospital

Pressure injuries are a significant problem for immobile patients in acute care and can have a profound impact on patients' health and well-being, putting pressure on healthcare systems and strain on the healthcare economy. Nurses play a pivotal role in preventing pressure injuries. A study using multiple methods was conducted to explore pressure injury prevention practices in four inpatient units within a tertiary-level Australian Hospital. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used to gather data across a 9-month period. Observations, audits, surveys and interviews were used to collect data across five time points. Statistical analysis of the quantitative data was undertaken, and thematic analysis was used to analyse qualitative data. Data were integrated using a realist evaluation framework. Ethical approval for the study was granted. The quantitative results demonstrated significant reductions in pressure injury prevalence from 11.5% at commencement to 4.8% at completion of the study. Hospital-acquired pressure injuries also reduced from 4.6% to 1.9%. These results were achieved even though nursing knowledge and attitudes did not increase during the study period. Three qualitative themes were identified: Making Nursing Care Visible, Understanding the 'Why' and Engagement is Key. This study demonstrates that pressure injuries can be prevented with improvements in nursing care processes. Nurses' knowledge and attitudes towards pressure injury prevention did not change throughout this study and further research is required on how nurses' knowledge and attitudes contribute towards pressure injury prevention practices.

Preventive care for individuals with deep pressure ulcers in Sweden living at home: A cross-sectional study

Background and Aims

Several factors exist regarding the risk for, healing and prevention of pressure ulcers (PUs). A mobile PU team with an individualized holistic approach adapted to the home or outpatient clinic setting could be beneficial for the prevention, and management of PUs.

Aims

To describe the mobile PU team's interventions among individuals who had deep PUs and were living at home. Another aim was to describe the patients' perceptions of the quality of the care and having a deep PU.

Methods

A quantitative study with a cross-sectional design. At an outpatient clinic, a mobile PU team was established to perform and follow up PU prevention interventions and advanced wound care treatment at home and at the outpatient clinic. All adult patients with existing deep category four PUs remitted to the outpatient clinic were asked to participate, and 16 out of 24 individuals consented. Instruments used for data collection were "Quality from the Patient's Perspective," "Wound-Quality of Life," "Modified Norton Scale," and a study developed protocol for the mobile team's PU interventions.

Results

The patients chose home visits 20 times and outpatient clinic visits 89 times. In total, 8-13 interventions per participant were performed by the mobile team. The results show that having PUs affected the participants' perceptions of care and general well-being. The PUs did not heal completely but they did improve, six patients underwent flap surgery.

Conclusion

When organizing care regarding patient safety for patients with deep PUs, it is important to consider the patient's perspective and well-being and to involve patients in their care plans. Home care is perhaps not the only way of caring; other aspects, in addition to telemedicine, could be an option.

Medical and surgical nurses' approach to patient pressure injury prevention education: An integrative review

AIMS

Identify and synthesise the published literature on the approaches and practices nurses use during the delivery of pressure injury prevention (PIP) education to hospitalised medical and surgical patients.

DESIGN

An integrated review.

METHODS

Whitmore and Knaff's (2005) five-stage methodology guided this review: (1) research problem identification; (2) literature search; (3) data evaluation; (4) data analysis; and (5) results. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (2020) Statement was followed. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool (2018). Extracted data were analysed using inductive content analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Journal publication dates from 1992 to 2022. Systematic searches of CINAHL (Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature) complete, Embase, PsycINFO (via Ovid) and Scopus databases were undertaken.

RESULTS

A total of 3892 articles were initially identified, four quantitative and two qualitative studies were included. Articles were published between 2013 and 2022.Two themes were identified: responsibility and workplace culture determine nurses' approach to PIP education delivery; and nurses tailor education strategies to address challenges and opportunities for PIP education delivery.

CONCLUSION

Nurses require resources to facilitate approaches to PIP education with medical and surgical patients. In the absence of clear instruction to support nurses' practice, PIP education for patients is at best delivered in an informal and ad hoc manner. Nurses require accessible education resources to enable them to tailor the content and frequency of PIP education to patients in med-surg settings.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

No patient or public contribution.

Barriers and facilitators to implementing pressure injury prevention and management guidelines in acute care: A mixed-methods systematic review

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based pressure injury prevention and management is a global health service priority. Low uptake of pressure injury guidelines leads to compromised patient outcomes. Understanding clinicians' and patients' views on the barriers and facilitators to implementing guidelines and mapping the identified barriers and facilitators to the Theoretical Domains Framework and behaviour change techniques will inform an end-user and theoretically informed intervention to improve guideline uptake in the acute care setting.

OBJECTIVES

To synthesise quantitative and qualitative evidence on i) hospital clinicians' and inpatients' perceptions and experiences of evidence-based pressure injury practices and ii) barriers and facilitators to implementing guidelines.

DESIGN

A convergent integrated mixed-methods systematic review was conducted using the JBI approach.

DATA SOURCE

English language peer-reviewed studies published from 2009 to August 2022 were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Cochrane Central Library.

REVIEW METHODS

Included studies reported: i) acute care hospital clinicians' and patients' perceptions and experiences of evidence-based pressure injury practices and ii) barriers and facilitators to implementing guidelines. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used for critical appraisal. Quantitative data was transformed into qualitised data, then thematically synthesised with qualitative data, comparing clinicians' and patients' views. Barriers and facilitators associated with each main theme were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework and allocated to relevant behaviour change techniques.

RESULTS

Fifty-five out of 14,488 studies of variable quality (29 quantitative, 22 qualitative, 4 mixed-methods) met the inclusion criteria. Four main themes represent factors thought to influence the implementation of evidence-based guidelines: 1) nurse-led multidisciplinary care, 2) patient participation in care, 3) practicability of implementation and 4) attitudes towards pressure injury prevention and management. Most barriers identified by clinicians were related to the third theme, whilst for patients, there were multiple barriers under theme 2. Barriers were mainly mapped to the Knowledge domain and Environmental Context and Resources domain and were matched to the behaviour change techniques of "instruction on how to perform a behaviour" and "restructuring the physical environment". Most facilitators mentioned by clinicians and patients were related to themes 1 and 2, respectively, and mapped to the Environmental Context and Resources domain. All patient-related attitudes in theme 4 were facilitators.

CONCLUSIONS

These review findings highlight the most influential factors related to implementing evidence-based pressure injury care from clinicians' and patients' views and mapping these factors to the Theoretical Domains Framework and behaviour change techniques has contributed to developing a stakeholder-tailored implementation intervention in acute care settings.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42021250885.

Patient perceptions and understanding of pressure ulcer risk in the community: Empirical Research Qualitative

AIMS

To explore patient perceptions and understanding of their pressure ulcer risk and how information is communicated between a nurse and patient in the home setting.

DESIGN

A pragmatic qualitative research design including community-dwelling patients, who were deemed at risk of developing a pressure ulcer.

METHODS

Observation of routine interactions between nurse and patient regarding their pressure ulcer risk and semi-structured interviews with 15 community patients following the nursing interaction.

RESULTS

Four key overarching themes emerged from the data analysis that were related to patient perceptions and understanding of pressure ulcer risk. These included Pressure Ulcer Awareness, Importance of Repositioning, Healthy Eating and Risk Interpretation.

CONCLUSION

Patient perception and understanding of pressure ulcer risk is different from the scientific, professional view. Patient risk perception was based on heuristics and wider personal factors and social influences.

IMPACT

The study provides important new insights into clinical practice in relation to how pressure ulcer advice and information are provided and interpreted in the community setting.

REPORTING METHOD

Adhered to the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: A small selection of patients within the NHS Trust in which the research was conducted contributed to the design of the study, in particular some of the interview questions and timing.

Systematic review of patient education for pressure injury: Evidence to guide practice

BACKGROUND

Pressure injuries (PIs) are generally regarded as predictable and preventable. Therefore, providing appropriate care for PI prevention and its management is vital. Patient education is a significant component of the PI international guideline-recommended strategy in preventing PIs. Despite the availability of evidence supporting patient education, consensus regarding the effect of patient education on knowledge, patient participation, wound healing progress, and quality of life is still lacking.

AIMS

The main aim was to systematically evaluate the available evidence regarding the effectiveness of structured patient education on their knowledge, participation, wound healing, and quality of life.

METHODS

The search strategy retrieved studies published between 2009 and 2021 in English across PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, ProQuest, and Cochrane Library. Adult participants aged 18 years and above were included. Randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental, and interventional studies were all included in this review. Three independent reviewers assessed the methodological quality of the studies, prior to critical appraisal, using standardized tools, that is, the Joanna Briggs Institute checklist for randomized and non-randomized studies. A narrative synthesis was conducted.

RESULTS

A total of eight studies (466 participants) were included in this review. Available evidence indicated improved patient knowledge, participation, and quality of life with structured patient education. However, there was insufficient high-quality evidence to conclude the effect on wound healing.

LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION

Structured patient education for PI was deemed to help improve patients' knowledge, participation, and quality of life. More rigorous trials are needed for the effect on wound healing progress. Thus, future educational interventions should include wound care components that describe the patient's role in promoting wound healing. A well-structured patient education program protocol is crucial to ensure the educational intervention was measurable in its effectiveness and reproducibility.

Registered nurses' approach to pressure injury prevention: A descriptive qualitative study

AIMS

To explore Registered Nurses' approaches to pressure injury prevention, including how they perceive their roles, how they prioritize pressure injury prevention and factors influencing prevention in the Chinese context.

DESIGN

A qualitative descriptive study.

METHODS

Audio-recorded, face-to-face, semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with Registered Nurses in a large tertiary hospital in China from August to December 2020. Using the System Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety Model, the interview guide was developed to describe the work system, processes and outcomes (three domains) associated with nurses' pressure injury prevention practices. Deductive and inductive content analyses were used.

FINDINGS

Twenty-seven nurses participated in the interviews. Four themes related to two domains of the model emerged: Work system: (i) Nurses lead and coordinate pressure injury prevention; Work processes: (ii) Individualized pressure injury prevention is founded on comprehensive patient assessment; (iii) Collaborating ensures patients receive appropriate pressure injury prevention; and (iv) Competing factors influence the delivery of appropriate pressure injury prevention. One category emerged about work outcome: Nurses strive to do their best in pressure injury prevention but hold major concerns when pressure injuries occur.

CONCLUSIONS

Nurses play a leading role in pressure injury prevention delivery but require appropriate resources and assistance and support from other healthcare personnel, patients and carers. Understaffing, lack of resources, complex reporting and poor patient compliance challenge nurses in their delivery of pressure injury prevention.

IMPACT

Pressure injury prevention is primarily a nursing responsibility therefore nurses' approaches to prevention were explored. Nurses rely on collaboration with others and access to various resources to provide pressure injury prevention. They recognize the patients' and carers' roles and acknowledge the importance of accessing guidance and support from nursing leaders and wound experts. Acknowledging nurses leading role in prevention and ensuring they have adequate resources are important for quality care.

Patient and carer experience of living with a pressure injury: A meta-synthesis of qualitative studies

INTRODUCTION

Pressure injuries are a significant cause of harm, contributing to increased mortality and financial burden on the healthcare system. Significant research on pressure injury risk assessment, prevention and treatment exists, but limited research exploring the patient and carer experience of living with pressure injury.

AIMS

The aim of this meta-synthesis was to describe the patient and carer experience of living with a pressure injury.

DESIGN

Meta-synthesis.

METHODS

A prospective review protocol was registered, and systematic search conducted across five electronic databases. The PRISMA 2020 checklist for reporting systematic reviews was used. Two reviewers independently undertook screening and review of articles, using the CASP checklist for evaluating qualitative research. A meta-synthesis using thematic content analysis was undertaken.

RESULTS

Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-synthesis led to the construction of three primary themes: loss of autonomy and independence, psychological effects, and adjustment. Within these primary themes, sub-themes of dependence, social isolation and social avoidance behaviours, feelings and emotions, loss, managing, physical consequences, service provision, and functional challenges, were identified.

CONCLUSION

The psychology and mindset of those involved, and support to navigate the challenges that arise are two unique and clinically relevant categorisations to guide provision of pressure injury care. Adaptation to a pressure injury is multi-faceted and contextual, challenges to adaptation create additional psychological burden. Interventions encompassing all facets of the experience are necessary. Current research into experiences is limited, and further research to support interventions is necessary.

Process evaluations undertaken alongside randomised controlled trials in the hospital setting: A scoping review

Background

There is increasing recognition of the importance of undertaking process evaluations alongside implementation of health interventions by examining mechanisms of impact and contextual factors. However, a comprehensive synthesis of process evaluations undertaken alongside clinical trials in hospital settings is lacking. We undertook a scoping review to address this gap.

Methods

This review was guided by the methodological framework for scoping studies. Studies were identified using four databases; Ovid Medline, EBSCO CINAHL, EMBASE and Scopus. Two authors independently screened all titles and available abstracts, with a third author available to adjudicate. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they described a process evaluation undertaken alongside a randomised controlled trial in the hospital setting. Data were abstracted by one author and checked by two others and analysed both descriptively and using inductive content analysis.

Results

Data were extracted from 30 articles reporting on 15 trials, most of which were cluster randomised trials (c-RTs) (n = 12). The most common data collection methods used in process evaluations were interviews, questionnaires or surveys, and records or logs. Data analysis revealed three themes relative to how authors: use process data to interpret, understand and explain trial outcomes; evaluate responses to the intervention; and consider the implementation context.

Conclusions

Findings from this review demonstrate the complex nature of intervention implementation in the hospital setting. Overall, there is need for standardised reporting of process evaluations and more explicit descriptions of how authors use frameworks to guide their evaluation.

When patients (and families) raise the alarm: Patient and family activated rapid response as a safety strategy for hospitals

Patients and those close to them often have an intimate understanding of their condition and can participate in a broad range of clinical processes. During times of deterioration, their concerns might go unheard. Advocacy of family and friends can fulfil an important safety function and can support patients and healthcare professionals looking after them. If concerns by patients are not heard by the patient's primary team in hospital, patient and family activated rapid response systems allow patients and family members to alert critical care outreach teams directly. These types of systems are stipulated by regulators in Australia and in parts of the USA, and there are examples in the UK built around the 'Call for Concern' model championed by the Royal Berkshire Hospital. Implementation is not without its problems and requires a deep understanding of barriers and enablers. Empowering patients to escalate directly might help to change safety culture and have protective effects for patients and staff. Policy makers are urged to consider standardised regulation to aid implementation.