TEAM-UP for quality: a cluster randomized controlled trial protocol focused on preventing pressure ulcers through repositioning frequency and precipitating factors

Assessing pressure injury knowledge among Jordanian and Turkish nursing students: A cross-cultural comparison

AIM

Pressure injuries, a prevalent issue in healthcare settings, have profound physical and emotional implications for patients and healthcare providers. However, further evidence is needed regarding the level of nursing students' knowledge of pressure injuries in the Middle East, a region where healthcare is rapidly evolving. This study examines the knowledge levels regarding pressure injuries among nursing students in Jordan and Turkey.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This cross-sectional study collected data from a randomly selected sample of 282 nursing students studying in two private and two Public Universities in Turkey and Jordan. Data was collected using a demographic survey and the Pressure Ulcer Knowledge Assessment Tool (PUKAT 2.0).

RESULTS

The overall knowledge scores among students were alarmingly low, with significant differences between Jordanian and Turkish cohorts, with Turkish students scoring higher. Moreover, a significant difference was observed between students' knowledge levels from public and private universities in Jordan, but no difference was found between students of the two Turkish universities.

CONCLUSION

The knowledge gap among nursing students regarding pressure ulcers is a critical issue that needs immediate attention. These findings highlight the urgent need for improved educational strategies and standardized competencies in this aspect. This study strongly advocates for changing teaching strategies and incorporating evidence-based pressure injury prevention education into nursing curricula, interprofessional education initiatives, and continuous professional development for faculty. These measures can significantly enhance nursing students' knowledge and improve patient care.

Movement and Pressure Injury Prevention Care for Nursing Home Residents: Addressing the Nescience

OBJECTIVE

To compare movement associated with position changes among nursing home residents who remain in lying versus upright positions for more than 2 hours and among residents living with obesity, dementia, or neither condition.

METHODS

The authors conducted a descriptive exploratory study using secondary data (N = 934) from the Turn Everyone And Move for Ulcer Prevention (TEAM-UP) clinical trial to examine transient movements (<60 seconds) within prolonged periods of 2 to 5 hours without repositioning.

RESULTS

Nursing home residents exhibit significantly more episodic transient movements when upright than lying. Residents with obesity or dementia exhibited similar frequencies of episodic transient movements compared with residents with neither obesity nor dementia. Upright or lying movements were more frequent among residents with obesity than among those with neither obesity nor dementia selectively when prolonged events ranged from 2 to 4 hours. Pairwise comparisons of movement rates among resident subgroups (living with obesity, living with dementia, or neither group) across repositioning intervals showed episodic transient movements were significantly higher across all subgroups for repositioning intervals up to 3 hours when compared with repositioning intervals of greater than 3 hours.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings challenge assumptions that nursing home residents are inactive and at risk for prolonged sitting. These preliminary findings, along with TEAM-UP findings where no pressure injuries occurred in up to 5 hours in prolonged positions, support establishing a standard 3-hour repositioning interval with use of high-density mattresses without a negative impact on pressure injury occurrence. There should be caution when considering repositioning intervals greater than 3 hours. Further research is indicated to explore protective effect of episodic transient movements of other subgroups.

Estimating the value of repositioning timing to streamline pressure injury prevention efforts in nursing homes: A cost-effectiveness analysis of the 'TEAM-UP' clinical trial

Pressure injury (PrI) prevention guidelines recommend 2-h repositioning intervals in healthcare settings, requiring significant nursing time investment. We analysed the cost-effectiveness of PrI prevention protocols with 2-, 3- and 4-h repositioning intervals in US nursing homes according to 'Turn Everyone and Move for Ulcer Prevention' (TEAM-UP) randomized controlled trial findings. Markov modelling compared 2-, 3- and 4-h repositioning intervals, controlling for other practice guidelines, to prevent PrIs in nursing home residents from a US health sector perspective over one year using TEAM-UP trial data for model structure, sampling and parameterization. Costs, captured in 2020 US dollars, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were used to derive an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and net monetary benefit (NMB) at $50 000/QALY-$150 000/QALY cost-effectiveness thresholds. Sensitivity analyses tested model uncertainty. Repositioning intervals between 3 and 4 h were cost-effective based on reduced costs at slightly lower QALYs than 2 h at a $50 000/QALY threshold, and the NMB of 4-h repositioning was also more efficient than at 3 h ($9610). Repositioning labour cost and prevention routines were among the most sensitive parameters. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that 3- and 4-h intervals were cost-effective in over 65% of simulations at any cost-effectiveness threshold. Repositioning intervals of 3 to 4 h have potential to reduce nursing time costs without significant decrements in clinical benefits to nursing home residents. Clinical guidelines for PrI prevention should be updated to reflect TEAM-UP clinical and economic findings. Facilities can use cost-savings recuperated from nursing time to deploy to other patient safety priorities without seriously jeopardizing PrI safety.

Factors associated with pressure ulcer and dehydration in long-term care settings in Ontario, Canada

Pressure ulcers and dehydration are common conditions among residents of long-term care facilities that result in negative health effects. They have been associated with signs of neglect and increased 30-day mortality among LTC residents. However, they are both preventable and with proper care can be effectively managed and treated. We conducted a retrospective cohort study to examine factors associated with pressure ulcers and dehydration among long-term care residents in the province of Ontario, Canada. Results indicated that close to one-fifth of residents were dehydrated (17.3%) or had a pressure ulcer (18.9%) during the study period. Advanced age was significantly associated with the presence of pressure ulcers and dehydration for both men and women. However, men were more likely to present with a pressure ulcer while women were more likely to exhibit symptoms of dehydration. Study findings also demonstrate the presence of both conditions being higher in municipal and not-for-profit homes compared to for-profit homes. The significant differences observed in relation to home ownership which require further investigation to identify the most relevant factors in explaining these differences. Overall, pressure ulcers and dehydration are preventable conditions that warrant attention from policymakers to ensure quality of care and resident safety are prioritized.

Development and validation of the fall-related injury risk in nursing homes (INJURE-NH) prediction tool

BACKGROUND

Existing models to predict fall-related injuries (FRI) in nursing homes (NH) focus on hip fractures, yet hip fractures comprise less than half of all FRIs. We developed and validated a series of models to predict the absolute risk of FRIs in NH residents.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of long-stay US NH residents (≥100 days in the same facility) between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2017 (n = 733,427) using Medicare claims and Minimum Data Set v3.0 clinical assessments. Predictors of FRIs were selected through LASSO logistic regression in a 2/3 random derivation sample and tested in a 1/3 validation sample. Sub-distribution hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated for 6-month and 2-year follow-up. Discrimination was evaluated via C-statistic, and calibration compared the predicted rate of FRI to the observed rate. To develop a parsimonious clinical tool, we calculated a score using the five strongest predictors in the Fine-Gray model. Model performance was repeated in the validation sample.

RESULTS

Mean (Q1, Q3) age was 85.0 (77.5, 90.6) years and 69.6% were women. Within 2 years of follow-up, 43,976 (6.0%) residents experienced ≥1 FRI. Seventy predictors were included in the model. The discrimination of the 2-year prediction model was good (C-index = 0.70), and the calibration was excellent. Calibration and discrimination of the 6-month model were similar (C-index = 0.71). In the clinical tool to predict 2-year risk, the five characteristics included independence in activities of daily living (ADLs) (HR 2.27; 95% CI 2.14-2.41) and a history of non-hip fracture (HR 2.02; 95% CI 1.94-2.12). Performance results were similar in the validation sample.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed and validated a series of risk prediction models that can identify NH residents at greatest risk for FRI. In NH, these models should help target preventive strategies.

The Nursing Home Severity Index and Application to Pressure Injury Risk: Measure Development and Validation Study

BACKGROUND

An assessment tool is needed to measure the clinical severity of nursing home residents to improve the prediction of outcomes and provide guidance in treatment planning.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to describe the development of the Nursing Home Severity Index, a clinical severity measure targeted for nursing home residents with the potential to be individually tailored to different outcomes, such as pressure injury.

METHODS

A retrospective nonexperimental design was used to develop and validate the Nursing Home Severity Index using secondary data from 9 nursing homes participating in the 12-month preintervention period of the Turn Everyone and Move for Ulcer Prevention (TEAM-UP) pragmatic clinical trial. Expert opinion and clinical literature were used to identify indicators, which were grouped into severity dimensions. Index performance and validation to predict risk of pressure injury were accomplished using secondary data from nursing home electronic health records, Minimum Data Sets, and Risk Management Systems. Logistic regression models including a resident's Worst-Braden score with/without severity dimensions generated propensity scores. Goodness of fit for overall models was assessed using C statistic; the significance of improvement of fit after adding severity components to the model was determined using the likelihood ratio chi-square test. The significance of each component was assessed with odds ratios. Validation based on randomly selected 65% training and 35% validation data sets was used to confirm the reliability of the severity measure. Finally, the discriminating ability of models was evaluated using propensity stratification to evaluate which model best discriminated between residents with/without pressure injury.

RESULTS

Data from 1015 residents without pressure injuries on admission were used for the Nursing Home Severity Index-Pressure Injury and included laboratory, weights/vitals/pain, underweight, and locomotion severity dimensions. Logistic regression C statistic measuring predictive accuracy increased by 19.3% (from 0.627 to 0.748; P<.001) when adding four severity dimensions to Worst-Braden scores. Significantly higher odds of developing pressure injuries were associated with increasing dimension scores. The use of the three highest propensity deciles predicting the greatest risk of pressure injury improved predictive accuracy by detecting 21 more residents who developed pressure injury (n=58, 65.2% vs n=37, 42.0%) when both severity dimensions and Worst-Braden score were included in prediction modeling.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical Nursing Home Severity Index-Pressure Injury was successfully developed and tested using the outcome of pressure injury. Overall predictive capacity was enhanced when using severity dimensions in combination with Worst-Braden scores. This index has the potential to significantly impact the quality of care decisions aimed at improving individual pressure injury prevention plans.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02996331; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02996331.

Movement Patterns of Transient and Prolonged Positioning Events in Nursing Home Residents: Results from the TEAM-UP Trial

OBJECTIVE

To characterize transient and prolonged body position patterns in a large sample of nursing home (NH) residents and describe the variability in movement patterns based on time of occurrence.

METHODS

This study is a descriptive, exploratory analysis of up to 28 days of longitudinal accelerometer data for 1,100 NH residents from the TEAM-UP (Turn Everyone and Move for Ulcer Prevention) clinical trial. Investigators analyzed rates of transient events (TEs; less than 60 seconds) and prolonged events (PEs; 60 seconds or longer) and their interrelationships by nursing shift.

RESULTS

Residents' positions changed for at least 1 minute (PEs) nearly three times per hour. Shorter-duration movements (TEs) occurred almost eight times per hour. Residents' PE rates were highest in shift 2 (3 pm to 11 pm ), when the median duration and maximum lengths of PEs were lowest; the least active time of day was shift 3 (11 pm to 7 am ). Three-quarters of all PEs lasted less than 15 minutes. The rate of TEs within PEs decreased significantly as the duration of PEs increased.

CONCLUSIONS

The NH residents demonstrate complex patterns of movements of both short and prolonged duration while lying and sitting. Findings represent how NH residents naturally move in real-world conditions and provide a new set of metrics to study tissue offloading and its role in pressure injury prevention.

Effect of Varying Repositioning Frequency on Pressure Injury Prevention in Nursing Home Residents: TEAM-UP Trial Results

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the clinical effectiveness of three nursing-home-wide repositioning intervals (2-, 3-, or 4-hour) without compromising pressure injury (PrI) incidence in 4 weeks.

METHODS

An embedded pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted in nine nursing homes (NHs) that were randomly assigned to one of three repositioning intervals. Baseline (12 months) and 4-week intervention data were provided during the TEAM-UP (Turn Everyone And Move for Ulcer Prevention) study. Intervention residents were without current PrIs, had PrI risk (Braden Scale score) ≥10 (not severe risk), and used viable 7-inch high-density foam mattresses. Each arm includes three NHs with an assigned single repositioning interval (2-, 3-, or 4-hour) as standard care during the intervention. A wireless patient monitoring system, using wearable single-use patient sensors, cued nursing staff by displaying resident repositioning needs on conveniently placed monitors. The primary outcome was PrI incidence; the secondary outcome was staff repositioning compliance fidelity.

RESULTS

From May 2017 to October 2019, 1,100 residents from nine NHs were fitted with sensors; 108 of these were ineligible for some analyses because of missing baseline data. The effective sample size included 992 residents (mean age, 78 ± 13 years; 63% women). The PrI incidence during the intervention was 0.0% compared with 5.24% at baseline, even though intervention resident clinical risk scores were significantly higher (P < .001). Repositioning compliance for the 4-hour repositioning interval (95%) was significantly better than for the 2-hour (80%) or 3-hour (90%) intervals (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that current 2-hour protocols can be relaxed for many NH residents without compromising PrI prevention. A causal link was not established between repositioning interval treatments and PrI outcome; however, no new PrIs developed. Compliance improved as repositioning interval lengthened.

Characteristics of Nursing Home Resident Movement Patterns: Results from the TEAM-UP Trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine movement patterns of nursing home residents, specifically those with dementia or obesity, to improve repositioning approaches to pressure injury (PrI) prevention.

METHODS

A descriptive exploratory study was conducted using secondary data from the Turn Everyone And Move for Ulcer Prevention (TEAM-UP) clinical trial examining PrI prevention repositioning intervals. K-means cluster analysis used the average of each resident's multiple days' observations of four summary mean daily variables to create homogeneous movement pattern clusters. Growth mixture models examined movement pattern changes over time. Logistic regression analyses predicted resident and nursing home cluster group membership.

RESULTS

Three optimal clusters partitioned 913 residents into mutually exclusive groups with significantly different upright and lying patterns. The models indicated stable movement pattern trajectories across the 28-day intervention period. Cluster profiles were not differentiated by residents with dementia (n = 450) or obesity (n = 285) diagnosis; significant cluster differences were associated with age and Braden Scale total scores or risk categories. Within clusters 2 and 3, residents with dementia were older (P < .0001) and, in cluster 2, were also at greater PrI risk (P < .0001) compared with residents with obesity; neither group differed in cluster 1.

CONCLUSIONS

Study results determined three movement pattern clusters and advanced understanding of the effects of dementia and obesity on movement with the potential to improve repositioning protocols for more effective PrI prevention. Lying and upright position frequencies and durations provide foundational knowledge to support tailoring of PrI prevention interventions despite few significant differences in repositioning patterns for residents with dementia or obesity.

To Turn or Not to Turn: Exploring Nurses' Decision-Making Processes Concerning Regular Turning of Nursing Home Residents

Background: Nursing home (NH) residents are at high-risk for pressure injuries (PrIs), and those living with Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias (ADRD) are at even greater risk. Understanding how nursing staff approach repositioning remains critical. Methods: As part of an ongoing clinical trial, this mixed-method prospective, exploratory, descriptive study examined repositioning efforts for PrI prevention. An investigator-developed checklist guided researcher observations, and focus groups revealed staff perspective on resident behaviors and corresponding repositioning approaches. Focus group transcripts were analyzed using the constant comparative coding method. Results: Repositioning observations were conducted for 88 residents. Resident behaviors and nursing approaches were similar between the ADRD (n = 62, 70%) and non-ADRD (n = 26, 30%) groups. Thirty-six staff participated in one of six focus group sessions. A conceptual model was developed to depict the repositioning process. Staff revealed care is guided by clinical frameworks and guidelines, along with resident preferences and behaviors. Conclusions: Protocol-driven, standardized PrI prevention care may limit the capacity to honor repositioning preferences. Insights from the focus groups highlight the importance of being cognizant of competing factors that may interfere with successful repositioning. Approaches by staff may be protocol-driven or an integrated method of care.

Natural History of Pressure Injury Among Ethnically/Racially Diverse Nursing Home Residents: The Pressure Ulcer Detection Study

The current observational study provides descriptive data on 270 pressure injuries (PrIs) among 142 racially/ethnically diverse nursing home (NH) residents over 16 weeks. Weekly assessments were conducted with the Bates-Jensen Wound Assessment Tool. NH data were obtained from public government websites. NH, resident, and PrI characteristics across race/ethnicity groups were compared using analysis of variance and chi-square. Participants were 62% female and 89% functionally dependent. More Black and Asian individuals had peripheral vascular disease. More Black individuals had persistent trunk and Stage 4 PrIs. Black and Hispanic individuals had normal skin color surrounding PrIs. More Asian individuals had PrIs surrounded by purple/red discolored skin. More Black individuals' heel PrIs were unstageable, necrotic, and showed no granulation. Black and Hispanic individuals exhibited more deep tissue injury. No NH or prevention differences existed. Health disparities found validate administrative data results. Differences in PrI characteristics should be further examined among diverse NH residents. [Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 47(3), 37-46.].

Factors affecting repositioning policy compliance: an integrative review

Objective

To explore the factors affecting nurses’ compliance with repositioning policy.

Methods

An integrative review was conducted following the Whittemore and Knafl methodology to identify the problem related to repositioning policy compliance. We searched the following databases: Coherence Wounds Group Specialized Register (Jan 1997 to Jun 2019), Ovid MEDLINE (Jan 1997 to Jun 2019), EBSCO CINAHL (Jan 1997 to Jun 2019), and Clinical Key database (Jan 2014 to Oct 2018).

Results

The review revealed three factors that influence repositioning compliance: nurse-related factors, patient-related factors, and Environment-related factors.

Conclusions

These factors directly impact one another and, in turn, influence the compliance of nurses to the repositioning policy. However, there is no evidence currently available that explains the collective impact of these factors and how they interact to affect repositioning policy compliance. Nevertheless, all these factors are important and should be considered to enhance and further improve the quality of nursing care and adherence to the repositioning policy.

Angiosomal Vascular Occlusions, Deep-Tissue Pressure Injuries, and Competing Theories: A Case Report

ABSTRACT

Compression of the soft tissue between a support surface and a bony prominence has long been the accepted primary mechanism of pressure injury (PrI) formation, with the belief that said compression leads to capillary occlusion, ischemia, and tissue necrosis. This explanation presupposes an "outside-in" pathophysiologic process of tissue damage originating at the local capillary level. Despite advances in prevention protocols, there remains a stubbornly consistent incidence of severe PrIs including deep-tissue injuries, the latter usually evolving into stage 4 PrIs with exposed bone or tendon. This article presents just such a perioperative case with the aim of providing further evidence that these more severe PrIs may result from ischemic insults of a named vessel within specific vascular territories (labeled as angiosomes). Pressure is indeed a factor in the formation of severe PrIs, but these authors postulate that the occlusion occurred at the level of a named artery proximal to the lesion. This vascular event was likely attributable to low mean arterial pressure. The authors suggest that the terminology proposed three decades ago to call both deep-tissue injuries and stage 4 PrIs "vascular occlusion pressure injuries" should be the topic of further research and expert consensus.

Repositioning for pressure injury prevention in adults

BACKGROUND

A pressure injury (PI), also referred to as a 'pressure ulcer', or 'bedsore', is an area of localised tissue damage caused by unrelieved pressure, friction, or shearing on any part of the body. Immobility is a major risk factor and manual repositioning a common prevention strategy. This is an update of a review first published in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical and cost effectiveness of repositioning regimens(i.e. repositioning schedules and patient positions) on the prevention of PI in adults regardless of risk in any setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and EBSCO CINAHL Plus on 12 February 2019. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned the reference lists of included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses, and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication, or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster-randomised trials (c-RCTs), published or unpublished, that assessed the effects of any repositioning schedule or different patient positions and measured PI incidence in adults in any setting.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently performed study selection, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and data extraction. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified five additional trials and one economic substudy in this update, resulting in the inclusion of a total of eight trials involving 3941 participants from acute and long-term care settings and two economic substudies in the review. Six studies reported the proportion of participants developing PI of any stage. Two of the eight trials reported within-trial cost evaluations. Follow-up periods were short (24 hours to 21 days). All studies were at high risk of bias. Funding sources were reported in five trials. Primary outcomes: proportion of new PI of any stage Repositioning frequencies: three trials compared different repositioning frequencies We pooled data from three trials (1074 participants) comparing 2-hourly with 4-hourly repositioning frequencies (fixed-effect; I² = 45%; pooled risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.41). It is uncertain whether 2-hourly repositioning compared with 4-hourly repositioning used in conjunction with any support surface increases or decreases the incidence of PI. The certainty of the evidence is very low due to high risk of bias, downgraded twice for risk of bias, and once for imprecision. One of these trials had three arms (967 participants) comparing 2-hourly, 3-hourly, and 4-hourly repositioning regimens on high-density mattresses; data for one comparison was included in the pooled analysis. Another comparison was based on 2-hourly versus 3-hourly repositioning. The RR for PI incidence was 4.06 (95% CI 0.87 to 18.98). The third study comparison was based on 3-hourly versus 4-hourly repositioning (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.92). The certainty of the evidence is low due to risk of bias and imprecision. In one c-RCT, 262 participants in 32 ward clusters were randomised between 2-hourly and 3-hourly repositioning on standard mattresses and 4-hourly and 6-hourly repositioning on viscoelastic mattresses. The RR for PI with 2-hourly repositioning compared with 3-hourly repositioning on standard mattress is imprecise (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.16; very low-certainty evidence). The CI for PI include both a large reduction and no difference for the comparison of 4-hourly and 6-hourly repositioning on viscoelastic foam (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.02). The certainty of the evidence is very low, downgraded twice due to high risk of bias, and once for imprecision. Positioning regimens: four trials compared different tilt positions We pooled data from two trials (252 participants) that compared a 30° tilt with a 90° tilt (random-effects; I² = 69%). There was no clear difference in the incidence of stage 1 or 2 PI. The effect of tilt is uncertain because the certainty of evidence is very low (pooled RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.10 to 3.97), downgraded due to serious design limitations and very serious imprecision. One trial involving 120 participants compared 30° tilt and 45° tilt with 'usual care' and reported no occurrence of PI events (low certainty evidence). Another trial involving 116 ICU patients compared prone with the usual supine positioning for PI. Reporting was incomplete and this is low certainty evidence. Secondary outcomes No studies reported health-related quality of life utility scores, procedural pain, or patient satisfaction. Cost analysis Two included trials also performed economic analyses. A cost-minimisation analysis compared the costs of 3-hourly and 4-hourly repositioning with 2-hourly repositioning schedule amongst nursing home residents. The cost of repositioning was estimated at CAD 11.05 and CAD 16.74 less per resident per day for the 3-hourly or 4-hourly regimen, respectively, compared with the 2-hourly regimen. The estimates of economic benefit were driven mostly by the value of freed nursing time. The analysis assumed that 2-, 3-, or 4-hourly repositioning is associated with a similar incidence of PI, as no difference in incidence was observed. A second study compared the nursing time cost of 3-hourly repositioning using a 30° tilt with standard care (6-hourly repositioning with a 90° lateral rotation) amongst nursing home residents. The intervention was reported to be cost-saving compared with standard care (nursing time cost per patient EUR 206.60 versus EUR 253.10, incremental difference EUR -46.50, 95% CI EUR -1.25 to EUR -74.60).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite the addition of five trials, the results of this update are consistent with our earlier review, with the evidence judged to be of low or very low certainty. There remains a lack of robust evaluations of repositioning frequency and positioning for PI prevention and uncertainty about their effectiveness. Since all comparisons were underpowered, there is a high level of uncertainty in the evidence base. Given the limited data from economic evaluations, it remains unclear whether repositioning every three hours using the 30° tilt versus "usual care" (90° tilt) or repositioning 3-to-4-hourly versus 2-hourly is less costly relative to nursing time.

Pressure Injury Prevention: Outcomes and Challenges to Use of Resident Monitoring Technology in a Nursing Home

PURPOSE:

We examined the usability, user perceptions, and nursing occupational subculture associated with introduction of a patient monitoring system to facilitate nursing staff implementation of standard care for pressure ulcer/injury prevention in the nursing home setting.

DESIGN:

Mixed methods, pre-/posttest design.

SUBJECTS AND SETTING:

Resident (n = 44) and staff (n = 38) participants were recruited from a 120-bed nursing home in the Southeast United States.

METHODS:

Digital data on frequency and position of residents were transmitted wirelessly from sensors worn on each resident's anterior chest to estimate nursing staff compliance with repositioning standard of care before and after visual monitors were activated to cue staff. The validated Nursing Culture Assessment Tool was used to determine changes in nursing culture. Benefits and challenges of implementation were assessed by 2 focus groups composed of 8 and 5 female members of the nursing staff (RN, LPN, CNA), respectively, and led by the three authors. Descriptive statistics were used for all quantitative variables, and inferential statistics were applied to categorical variables (χ² test or Fisher exact test) and continuous variables (analyses of variance or equivalent nonparametric tests), respectively, where a 2-sided P value of <.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS:

System use significantly (P = .0003) improved compliance with every 2-hour repositioning standards. The nursing culture normative ranking percentage increased from 30.9% to 58.2%; this difference was not statistically significant. Focus groups expressed satisfaction with the monitoring system and recommended improvements to support adaptation and use of technology.

CONCLUSIONS:

Study findings support the usability of the patient monitoring system to facilitate repositioning. Implementation of multiple strategies for training, supplies, and communication may enhance uptake and effectiveness.