Search

Objective: To identify risk factors independently predictive of pressure ulcer development in adult patient populations?, Design: A systematic review of primary research was undertaken, based upon methods recommended for effectiveness questions but adapted to identify observational risk factor studies., Data Sources: Fourteen electronic databases were searched, each from inception until March 2010, with hand searching of specialist journals and conference proceedings; contact with experts and a citation search. There was no language restriction., Review Methods: Abstracts were screened, reviewed against the eligibility criteria, data extracted and quality appraised by at least one reviewer and checked by a second. Where necessary, statistical review was undertaken. We developed an assessment framework and quality classification based upon guidelines for assessing quality and methodological considerations in the analysis, meta-analysis and publication of observational studies. Studies were classified as high, moderate, low and very low quality. Risk factors were categorised into risk factor domains and sub-domains. Evidence tables were generated and a summary narrative synthesis by sub-domain and domain was undertaken., Results: Of 5462 abstracts retrieved, 365 were identified as potentially eligible and 54 fulfilled the eligibility criteria. The 54 studies included 34,449 patients and acute and community patient populations. Seventeen studies were classified as high or moderate quality, whilst 37 studies (68.5%) had inadequate numbers of pressure ulcers and other methodological limitations. Risk factors emerging most frequently as independent predictors of pressure ulcer development included three primary domains of mobility/activity, perfusion (including diabetes) and skin/pressure ulcer status. Skin moisture, age, haematological measures, nutrition and general health status are also important, but did not emerge as frequently as the three main domains. Body temperature and immunity may be important but require further confirmatory research. There is limited evidence that either race or gender is important., Conclusions: Overall there is no single factor which can explain pressure ulcer risk, rather a complex interplay of factors which increase the probability of pressure ulcer development. The review highlights the limitations of over-interpretation of results from individual studies and the benefits of reviewing results from a number of studies to develop a more reliable overall assessment of factors which are important in affecting patient susceptibility., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: While there has been great interest in the effect of nurse staffing levels have on the quality of care in hospitals, less attention has been given to determining the factors that affect the nursing workload. There are no existing studies that help define measurable factors that have a clear relation to nursing workload., Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine the most important and measurable factors, other than patient acuity, that influence nursing workload., Design: A cross-sectional design., Settings: Hospitals within the acute hospital care setting., Participants: Persons with a nursing educational background, working in Belgian acute care hospitals., Methods: A self-administered questionnaire was developed based on the results of an integrative review, the use of focus groups and a survey on measurability and relevance of the included factors. The questionnaire listed relevant and measurable factors related to nursing workload. Weight and frequency of each factor was assessed., Results: The initial list consisted of 94 factors. These factors were regrouped and organised into a questionnaire of 28 measurable and sufficiently relevant factors affecting the nursing workload. More than half of the initial factors seemed to be relevant, but hard to measure on a daily basis. Based on the impact of each factor, the number of work interruptions was the most important factor related to nursing workload., Conclusions: It is unlikely that a workload instrument will ever be able to take into account all possible factors affecting the nursing workload. Nevertheless, the number of work interruptions, the patient turnover rate and the number of mandatory registrations should be included in the development or revision of a workload measurement tool., (© 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The duration and the amount of pressure and shear must be reduced in order to minimize the risk of pressure ulcer development. Alternating low pressure air mattresses with multi-stage inflation and deflation cycle of the air cells have been developed to relieve pressure by sequentially inflating and deflating the air cells. Evidence about the effectiveness of this type of mattress in clinical practice is lacking., Aim: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of an alternating low pressure air mattress that has a standard single-stage inflation and deflation cycle of the air cells with an alternating low pressure air mattress with multi-stage inflation and deflation cycle of the air cells., Methods and Materials: A randomised controlled trial was performed in a convenience sample of 25 wards in five hospitals in Belgium. In total, 610 patients were included and randomly assigned to the experimental group (n=298) or the control group (n=312). In the experimental group, patients were allocated to an alternating low pressure air mattress with multi-stage inflation and deflation cycle of the air cells. In the control group, patients were allocated to an alternating low pressure air mattress with a standard single-stage inflation and deflation cycle of the air cells. The outcome was defined as cumulative pressure ulcer incidence (Grade II-IV). An intention-to-treat analysis was performed., Results: There was no significant difference in cumulative pressure ulcer incidence (Grade II-IV) between both groups (Exp.=5.7%, Contr.=5.8%, p=0.97). When patients developed a pressure ulcer, the median time was 5.0 days in the experimental group (IQR=3.0-8.5) and 8.0 days in the control group (IQR=3.0-8.5) (Mann-Whitney U-test=113, p=0.182). The probability to remain pressure ulcer free during the observation period in this trial did not differ significantly between the experimental group and the control group (log-rank χ(2)=0.013, df=1, p=0.911)., Conclusion: An alternating low pressure air mattress with multi-stage inflation and deflation of the air cells does not result in a significantly lower pressure ulcer incidence compared to an alternating low pressure air mattress with a standard single-stage inflation and deflation cycle of the air cells. Both alternating mattress types are equally effective to prevent pressure ulcer development., (© 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patient care guidelines are usually implemented one at a time, yet patients are at risk for multiple, often preventable, adverse events simultaneously., Objective: This study aimed to test the effect of the SAFE or SORRY? programme on the incidence of three adverse events (pressure ulcers, urinary tract infections and falls). This paper describes Part I of the study: the effect on the incidence of adverse events., Design: A cluster randomised trial was conducted between September 2006 and November 2008. After a three-month baseline period the intervention was implemented followed by a nine-month follow-up period., Settings: Ten wards from four hospitals and ten wards from six nursing homes were stratified for institute and ward type and then randomised to intervention or usual care group., Participants: During baseline and follow-up, patients (≥18 years) with an expected length of stay of at least five days, were asked to participate., Methods: The SAFE or SORRY? programme consisted of the essential recommendations of guidelines for the three adverse events. A multifaceted implementation strategy was used for the implementation: education, patient involvement and feedback on process and outcome indicators. The usual care group continued care as usual. Data were collected on the incidence of adverse events and a Poisson regression model was used to estimate the rate ratio of the adverse events between the intervention and the usual care group at follow-up., Results: At follow-up, 2201 hospital patients with 3358 patient weeks and 392 nursing home patients with 5799 patient weeks were observed. Poisson regression analyses showed a rate ratio for the development of an adverse event in favour of the intervention group of 0.57 (95% CI: 0.34-0.95) and 0.67 (95% CI: 0.48-0.99) for hospital patients and nursing home patients respectively., Conclusion: This study showed that implementing multiple guidelines simultaneously is possible, which is promising. Patients in the intervention groups developed 43% and 33% fewer adverse events compared to the usual care groups in hospitals and nursing homes respectively. Even so, more research is necessary to underline these results., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00365430., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Non-adherence to leg ulcer regimen is a major problem. Reasons for non-adherent behaviour are not fully understood. Literature about processes underlying adherence in leg ulcer patients is scarce., Objectives: To explore the processes underlying adherent behaviour in patients with leg ulcers who received an intervention to enhance adherence to leg ulcer lifestyle advice., Design: A qualitative field study was conducted among patients receiving an adherence-promoting intervention., Settings: The study was carried out in a home care setting in Belgium., Participants: Twenty-six patients with venous leg ulcers were included and received the intervention from five tissue viability nurses in a community healthcare organisation., Methods: Semi-structured interviews with open-ended questions were held with patients and nurses after the end of the intervention. Data were also collected by means of participant observation. Data collection and data analysis took place iteratively and analysis was validated by means of researcher triangulation., Results: Trust in the nurse was central to leg ulcer treatment adherence. Patients who had a trusting relationship with their nurse showed better adherence to the recommended lifestyle modifications. Trust was facilitated by nurses spending meaningful time with the patient, which means they took time to talk with the patient. Trust was also established because nurses provided care beyond patients' expectations, taking time for wound care and being attentive to pain and other problems. A trusting relationship promoted 'compliance' even if patients were not convinced of the benefits of the leg ulcer lifestyle advice. Perceived physical improvement and diminished discomfort after following the lifestyle advice convinced patients of the importance and positive effect of the regimen, which they doubted at first. Self-efficacy for performing leg exercises was often much higher than self-efficacy for being physically active and elevating the legs. Physical impediments, co-morbidities and socio-structural impediments influenced the patient's ability to adhere to leg ulcer advice., Conclusions: A conceptual framework to understand adherence to leg ulcer treatment was developed. Nurses should be aware of how nurse-related factors can affect adherence. Aspects that foster trust could be incorporated into leg ulcer care., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Pressure ulcers continue to be a significant problem in hospitals, nursing homes and community care settings. Pressure ulcer incidence is widely accepted as an indicator for the quality of care. Negative attitudes towards pressure ulcer prevention may result in suboptimal preventive care. A reliable and valid instrument to assess attitudes towards pressure ulcer prevention is lacking., Aims and Objectives: Development and psychometric evaluation of the Attitude towards Pressure ulcer Prevention instrument (APuP)., Design: Prospective psychometric instrument validation study., Methods: A literature review was performed to design the instrument. Content validity was evaluated by nine European pressure ulcer experts and five experts in psychometric instrument validation in a double Delphi procedure. A convenience sample of 258 nurses and 291 nursing students from Belgium and The Netherlands participated in order to evaluate construct validity and stability reliability of the instrument. The data were collected between February and May 2008., Results: A factor analysis indicated the construct of a 13 item instrument in a five factor solution: (1) attitude towards personal competency to prevent pressure ulcers (three items); (2) attitude towards the priority of pressure ulcer prevention (three items); (3) attitude towards the impact of pressure ulcers (three items); (4) attitude towards personal responsibility in pressure ulcer prevention (two items); and (5) attitude towards confidence in the effectiveness of prevention (two items). This five factor solution accounted for 61.4% of the variance in responses related to attitudes towards pressure ulcer prevention. All items demonstrated factor loadings over 0.60. The instrument produced similar results during stability testing [ICC=0.88 (95% CI=0.84-0.91, P<0.001)]. For the total instrument, the internal consistency (Cronbachs alpha) was 0.79., Conclusion: The APuP is a psychometrically sound instrument that can be used to effectively assess attitudes towards pressure ulcer prevention in patient care, education, and research. In further research, the association between attitude, knowledge and clinical performance should be explored., (Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Profound knowledge of pressure ulcers is important to enable good prevention. Validity and reliability of instruments assessing pressure ulcer knowledge are limited evaluated in previous research., Aims and Objectives: To develop a valid and reliable instrument to assess knowledge of pressure ulcer prevention., Design: Prospective psychometric instrument validation study., Methods: An extensive literature review was performed to develop an instrument to assess knowledge of pressure ulcer prevention. Face and content validity were evaluated in a double Delphi procedure by an expert panel of nine trustees of the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (EPUAP) who each have extensive experience in pressure ulcer care and research (PhD level). A convenience sample of 608 nurses and nursing students from Belgium and The Netherlands participated to evaluate validity of the multiple-choice test items (item difficulty, discriminating index, quality of the response alternatives), construct validity, internal consistency, and stability of the instrument. The data were collected between February and May 2008., Results: A 26-item instrument was developed, reflecting 6 themes expressing the most relevant aspects of pressure ulcer prevention. The content validity was excellent (CVI=0.78-1.00). Group scores of nurses with a (theoretically expected) high level of expertise were found to be statistically significantly higher than those of participants with (theoretically expected) less expertise (P<0.001). The item difficulty index of the questions ranged from 0.27 to 0.87, while values for item discrimination ranged from 0.29 to 0.65. The quality of the response alternatives was found to be good. The overall internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha) was 0.77. The 1-week test-retest intraclass correlation coefficient (stability) was 0.88., Conclusion: The instrument demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties and can be applied in both research and practice for evaluating knowledge about pressure ulcer prevention., (Copyright 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The purpose of this paper is to examine and synthesise the literature on alternating pressure air mattresses (APAMs) as a preventive measure for pressure ulcers., Design: Literature review., Data Sources: PubMed, Cinahl, Central, Embase, and Medline databases were searched to identify original and relevant articles. Additional publications were retrieved from the references cited in the publications identified during the electronic database search., Results: Thirty-five studies were included. Effectiveness and comfort of APAMs were the main focuses of the studies evaluating APAMs. Pressure ulcer incidence, contact interface pressure, and blood perfusion were the most frequently used outcome measures to evaluate the effectiveness of APAMs. Fifteen randomised controlled trials (RCTs) analysed the pressure ulcer incidence. One RCT compared a standard hospital mattress with an APAM and found that the APAM was a more effective preventive measure. RCTs comparing APAMs with constant-low-air mattresses resulted in conflicting evidence. There was also no clear evidence as to which type of APAM performed better. All RCTs had methodological flaws. The use of contact interface pressure and blood perfusion measurements to evaluate the effectiveness of APAMs is questionable. Comfort of APAMs was the primary outcome measure in only four studies. Different methods for assessment were used and different types of APAMs were evaluated. Better measures for comfort are needed. A few studies discussed technical problems associated with APAMs. Educating nurses in the correct use of APAMs is advisable., Conclusion: Taking into account the methodological issues, we can conclude that APAMs are likely to be more effective than standard hospital mattresses. Contact interface pressure and blood perfusion give only a hypothetical conclusion about APAMs' effectiveness. Additional large, high-quality RCTs are needed. No conclusions can be drawn regarding the comfort of APAMs. A number of technical problems associated with APAMs are related to nurses' improper use of the devices.

Background: Turning is considered to be an effective way of preventing pressure ulcers, however almost no research has been undertaken on this method., Aim: The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of four different preventative regimes involving either frequent turning (2, 3 hourly) or the use of a pressure-reducing mattress in combination with less frequent turning (4, 6 hourly)., Subjects: 838 geriatric nursing home patients participated in the study., Methods: During 28 days, four different turning schemes were used: turning every 2 h on a standard institutional (SI) mattress (n = 65), turning every 3 h on a SI mattress (n = 65), turning every 4 h on a viscoelastic foam (VE) mattress (n = 67), and turning every 6h on a VE mattress (n = 65). The remaining patients (n = 576) received standard preventive care., Main Results: The incidence of non-blanchable erythema (34.8-38.1%) was not different between the groups. The incidence of grade II and higher pressure ulcers in the 4h interval group was 3.0%, compared with incidence figures in the other groups varying between 14.3% and 24.1%., Conclusions: Turning every 4 h on a VE mattress resulted in a significant reduction in the number of pressure ulcer lesions and makes turning a feasible preventive method in terms of effort and cost.