Pressure Injury Risk Assessment and Prevention in Patients With COVID-19 in the Intensive Care Unit

Increased Risk and Unique Clinical Course of Patient Safety Indicator-3 Pressure Injuries Among COVID-19 Hospitalized Patients

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic introduced unique challenges to healthcare systems, particularly in relation to patient safety and adverse events during hospitalization. There is limited understanding of COVID-19's association with some patient safety indicators (PSIs).

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the impact of COVID-19 infection on the rate of PSI-3 events and its implications on quality metrics. We compared PSI-3 event rates between COVID-19-infected and uninfected patients and examined the clinical characteristics of COVID-19 patients experiencing PSI-3 events.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study at Mayo Clinic hospitals between January 2020 and February 2022, analyzing patients meeting PSI-3 denominator eligibility criteria. PSI-3 events were identified using AHRQ WinQI software. Patients were categorized based on COVID-19 status. Patient demographics, characteristics, and PSI-3 rates were compared. A case series analysis described clinical details of COVID-19 patients with PSI-3 events.

RESULTS

Of 126,781 encounters meeting PSI-3 criteria, 8674 (6.8%) had acute COVID-19 infection. COVID-19-infected patients were older, more likely to be male, non-white, and had private insurance. PSI-3 rates were significantly higher in COVID-19 patients (0.21% versus 0.06%, P < 0.0001), even after risk adjustment (adjusted risk ratio, 3.24, P < 0.0001). The case series of 17 COVID-19 patients with PSI-3 events showed distinctive clinical characteristics, including higher medical device-related pressure injuries, and greater predisposition for head, face, and neck region.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute COVID-19 infection correlates with higher PSI-3 event rates. Current quality indicators may require adaptation to address the pandemic's complexities and impact on patient safety. Further research is needed to comprehensively understand the intricate relationship between COVID-19 and patient outcomes.

Psychometric properties of the Braden scale to assess pressure injury risk in intensive care: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the psychometric properties of the Braden scale to assess pressure injury risk in adults in intensive care.

DESIGN

A systematic review was conducted, with literature searches undertaken in five electronic databases. No date limits were applied. Selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were completed by two reviewers independently. A customised data extraction template was used, with risk of bias conducted using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. Data were analysed using narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies met inclusion criteria. Two studies reported internal consistency with Cronbach's alpha ranging from poor (0.43) to good (0.85). For interrater reliability, only four studies reported intraclass correlation, ranging from 0.66 to 0.96 for Braden sum score. Three studies reported convergent validity, with strong associations found between the COMHON Index (r = 0.70), Cubbin-Jackson scale (r = 0.80), and Norton scale (r = 0.77), but contrasting associations with the Waterlow score (r = 0.22 to 0.72). A large majority of studies reported predictive validity (n = 29), with wide variability. Several studies investigated optimal cut-off scores, with the majority indicating this was in the range of 12-14.

CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrates inconsistency in the psychometric properties of the Braden scale in ICU settings. Further research is needed to determine suitability of the Braden scale for ICU before it can be recommended as standard for clinical practice, including comparison with other ICU-specific risk assessment tools.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

When used in ICU, the reliability, validity and reported cut-off scores of the Braden scale are variable. As a predictive tool, the scale should be used cautiously. In ICU, the value of the Braden scale resides in its ability to identify patients that are most at risk of developing a pressure injury and to implement preventative measures to mitigate identified risk factors.

Strategies to preventing pressure injuries among intensive care unit patients mechanically ventilated in prone position: a systematic review and a Delphi study

Background

Although the incidence of pressure injury in the prone position is high for the mechanically ventilated patients in the intensive care unit, evidence-based strategies are still lacking.

Propose

To conduct a systematic review of current evidence, and to propose a series of strategies to prevent pressure injuries among mechanically ventilated patients with prone position in the intensive care unit.

Methods

The study was guided by the Medical Research Council framework. After a systematic review of current evidence of original articles, guidelines, expert consensus and theories, a strategy draft was developed. Then we invited 20 experts to modify and refine these strategies through two rounds of Delphi consensus method.

Results

After two rounds of Delphi process, the importance of coefficient of variation (Cv) and Kendall's coefficient of concordance in the strategies repository were 0.067 and 0.311, respectively. And the operability of Cv and Kendall's coefficient of concordance in the strategy draft was 0.055 and 0.294, respectively. Ultimately, we established 31 strategies for including 7 themes (assess risk factors, assess skin and tissue, body position management, skin care, nutrition, preventing medical device-related pressure injuries, education and supervision). In addition, we also developed a strategy framework to clarify our strategies.

Conclusion

According to the Medical Research Council framework, we developed 7 themes and 31 strategies to prevention prone-position pressure injuries among the intensive care unit mechanically ventilated patients. This study was considered to improve the clinical management of pressure injuries among prone position patients in the intensive care unit settings.

The PRINCOVID Retrospective Study: A Predictive Model of Pressure Injuries for Critical COVID-19 Patients

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study is to characterize pressure injuries, identify risk factors, and develop a predictive model for pressure injuries at intensive care unit admission for critical COVID-19 patients.

DESIGN

This study was a retrospective analysis of a consecutive sample of patients admitted to intensive care unit between May 2020 and September 2021. Inclusion criteria encompassed the diagnosis of acute respiratory distress syndrome due to SARS-CoV-2, requiring invasive mechanical ventilation more than 48 hrs. The following predictors were evaluated: sociodemographic characteristics, comorbidities, as well as clinical and laboratory findings at intensive care unit admission. The primary outcome was the presence of pressure injuries.

RESULTS

Two hundred five patients were included, mostly males (73%) with a mean age of 62 yrs. Pressure injury prevalence was 58%. On multivariable analysis, male sex, hypertension, hemoglobin, and albumin at intensive care unit admission were independently associated with pressure injuries, constituting the PRINCOVID model. The model reached an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.71, surpassing the Braden scale ( P = 0.0015). The PRINCOVID score ranges from 0 to 15, with two risk groups: "at risk"(≤7 points) and "high risk"(>7 points).

CONCLUSIONS

This study proposes PRINCOVID as a multivariable model for developing pressure injuries in critical COVID-19 patients. Based on four parameters (sex, hypertension, hemoglobin, and albumin at intensive care unit admission), this model fairly predicts the development of pressure injuries. The PRINCOVID score allows patients' classification into two groups, facilitating early identification of high-risk patients.

Analysis of the Protective Effect of Infection Controllers Supervising Third-Party Personnel Entering and Leaving Shanghai Fangcang Shelter Hospital

Objective

To analyze the impact of the new supervision and management methods of infection controllers on the protection of third-party personnel entering and leaving Shanghai Fangcang shelter hospital, to provide a reference for the management of third-party personnel in Fangcang shelter hospitals.

Methods

A total of 200 third-party personnel received with traditional supervision and management methods, and 156 received new supervision and management methods from the Fangcang shelter hospital of the Shanghai International Convention and Exhibition Center. The sociodemographic characteristics of third-party personnel, including gender, age, education level, work experience in fighting the epidemic with safety awareness, was analyzed. The effects of the two different management modes on the protection of third-party personnel were statistically analyzed by the Chi-square test or logistic regression analysis.

Results

There were statistically significant differences in the incidence of infection among third-party personnel in terms of age, education level, work experience in fighting the epidemic in traditional supervision and management group, and whether they accepted the new supervision and management model had statistically significant differences (p <0.05). The main causes of incorrect put on and take off protective clothing, such as wrong way to detach the face screen, wrong way to remove goggles, wrong way to undress protective clothing, wrong way to take off the shoe cover, hand washing steps omitted, are that causes infection of third-party personnel (p <0.05).

Conclusion

The new supervision and management model can reduce the infection rate of third-party personnel in Fangcang shelter hospitals through planned and purposeful training in terms of different age groups, education levels, work experience, and acceptance of protection knowledge.