Search

Background: A skin tear is a traumatic wound that occurs in up to one in five hospitalized patients. Nursing care includes application of a dressing to create a moist wound healing environment. Aim: To compare the effectiveness of two standard dressings (adhesive silicone foam vs. meshed silicone interface) to heal hospital‐acquired skin tear. Methods: An intention‐to‐treat pilot study was designed using a randomized, non‐inferiority trial in an Australian tertiary hospital setting. Consenting participants (n = 52) had acquired a skin tear within the previous 24 h and had agreed to a 3‐week follow‐up. Data were collected between 2014 and 2020. The primary outcome measure was wound healing at 21 days. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar in both arms. Per protocol, 86% of skin tears were fully healed at 3 weeks in the adhesive silicone foam group, compared to 59% in the meshed silicone interface group. Greater healing was observed across all skin tear categories in the adhesive silicone foam dressing group. In the intention‐to‐treat sample, healing was 69% and 42%, respectively. Conclusions: Results suggest the adhesive silicone foam dressing may be superior, as it produced clinically significant healing of skin tears at 3 weeks compared to the meshed silicone interface dressing. Accounting for potential loss to follow‐up, a sample of at least 103 participants per arm would be required to power a definitive study. Summary statement: What is already known about this topic? A skin tear is a traumatic wound that is commonly acquired during hospitalization that affects older adults in particular. In hospital settings, it may occur in up to one in five patients.A variety of skin tear dressings have been used in previous studies, with healing rates ranging from 34% to 97% at 21 days; however, evidence for the most effective dressing type is inconclusive.If treated inappropriately, or left untreated, minor skin tears can become chronic or complicated wounds, yet prevalence and treatment of hospital‐acquired injuries are under‐reported. What this paper adds? Based on our per‐protocol results, an adhesive silicone foam dressing may be superior, as it produced clinically significant healing of 86% of skin tears at 3 weeks compared to 59% with the meshed silicone interface dressing.Based on the methods and results from this pilot study, a future definitive trial would be feasible but would need to account for a relatively large loss to follow‐up rate. The implications of this paper: Using our intention‐to‐treat results, a future study would need a sample size of 103 per arm to be sufficiently powered, which may be impractical to achieve within a single hospital setting; thus, a multi‐site study would be advisable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Problem: Nurses are fundamental in presenting information to their patients to ensure understanding of information, and health directions enabling improved health outcomes. Limited research exists exploring how nurses assess patient's health literacy in Australia. Aim: To explore Australian nurses' perceptions of patients' health literacy and how nurses assess health literacy to provide patient education. Design: A qualitative study underpinned by phenomenology. Methods: Registered Nurses (N = 19) across five Queensland hospitals participated in semi‐structured interviews which explored nurses' assessment of patient's health literacy level and their practices of delivering education. The transcripts were analysed using an inductive process with interpretative analysis. Results: Four themes were identified: how we assess patient health literacy; challenges with health literacy assessment; consumer focused assessment; and building assessment strategies. Participants relied on cues from the patient to identify when information has not been understood. Participants felt that online training programs in the workplace would assist in education for assessment techniques; identification of patients with low health literacy; and how to best communicate with patients that have low health literacy. Conclusion: Formal health literacy assessments should be introduced to hospitals in Australia, but training is required to enable the nurse, the confidence and ability for health literacy assessment. Tailored education based on health literacy assessment would enhance the patient's understanding and improve discharge planning, which may reduce health service costs and readmissions. Reporting method: The Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) guidelines for qualitative research were followed. Patient or public contribution: Registered Nurses (N = 19) participated in qualitative interviews, providing data for analysis. Relevance to clinical practice: This study shows that nurses are already conducting informal assessments, simply by using observation and looking for cues. More education for nurses about health literacy and how to tailor their discussions with patients will improve communication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To determine the reporting accuracy of pressure injury categorisation by bedside clinicians, compared with nurse experts. Background: Pressure injuries are an enduring complication of hospitalisation. The categorisation of pressure injury affects treatment and management decision‐making and use of resources, and severe hospital‐acquired pressure injury incidence is used to benchmark quality of care. However, it is unclear how accurately pressure injuries are categorised by clinicians in practice. Design: Secondary analysis of hospital pressure injury incident and validation data. Methods: All pressure injuries reported in adults between 2016 and 2019 that were subsequently validated by nurse experts were analysed. Absolute agreement is reported using percentages, with inter‐rater agreement reported using Kappa measure of agreement. The GRRAS reporting guideline was followed. Results: Of 6186 pressure injuries that were analysed, the category was reported correctly in 67.3% (n = 4163), with an overall moderate level of inter‐rater agreement by category (Κ =.567, p <.001). Of those found to be non‐pressure injuries when validated (18.3%, n = 1129), most were reported originally as stage II (41.2%, n = 465) or stage I (30.5%, n = 344), and 13.4% (n = 151) were categorised initially as unstageable. The majority reported initially as stage I, stage II, suspected deep tissue injury or mucosal pressure injury were validated, whereas half of those reported initially as stage III or IV were validated and less than a third of those reported initially as unstageable pressure injuries were validated. Conclusions: This study provides important insight into the accuracy of pressure injury categorisation. Whilst moderate agreement of categorisation was found between reporting clinicians and nurse experts, pressure injury differential diagnosis and categorisation of severe injuries were inadequate. Relevance to Clinical Practice: These results may be used for benchmarking and provide a focal point for future education and practice improvement efforts. Patient or Public Contribution: Neither patients nor the public were directly involved in the project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim(s): To ascertain nurses' perceptions about, and suggestions for, management solutions to workplace violence perpetrated by patients. Background: Violence towards nurses from patients in the workplace is high in Australia. There is a need for good management responses, and experienced nurses can provide logistical suggestions about effective strategies. Method(s): This study uses an exploratory qualitative design. Focus group interviews were undertaken with 23 nurses working in a regional public hospital in Queensland, Australia. The COREQ research reporting checklist was followed, and the qualitative data were transcribed and thematically analysed manually and by NVivo. Results: Policy implementation, training, staff movement, seclusion, debriefing and a full reporting cycle were identified as central themes. Workplace violence management happens before, during and after a violent event. Conclusion(s): Weak processes undermine management; staff training on de‐escalation is needed. Affected staff need freedom to move from the ward. Better medical orders should be in place before an event. A full debriefing and feedback cycle are required, along with easier reporting processes. Implications for Nursing Management: Nursing management can reduce violence by ensuring better institutional support, consistent follow‐up and complete feedback procedures. Legal support, follow‐up mechanisms and staff training in de‐escalation are key points. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]