Pressure ulcer risk profiles of hospitalized patients based on the Braden Scale: A cluster analysis.

Aim: The aim of this work is to identify the pressure ulcer risk profiles of hospitalized patients with reference to Braden Scale subscales. Methods: A total of 2996 hospitalized Portuguese participants were screened using the Braden Scale. A hierarchical and nonhierarchical cluster analysis was conducted, with ethical approval. Results: Five risk profiles (clusters) based on the first risk assessments were identified. Regarding the Braden Scale total score, two profiles with high risk and three profiles with low risk of pressure ulcer development were identified. All clusters were statistically significantly different in terms of sociodemographic and clinical variables. When the first and the last risk assessments were compared, all the clusters improved the Braden Scale total score on the last risk assessment, except Cluster 4 (low‐risk category). Clusters 3, 4 and 5, which were classified as low risk, decreased in several Braden subscales at the last risk assessment. Conclusions: The classification of low risk may misguide the early identification of patients with individual risk factors. Increasing the awareness of health care professionals for the importance of risk assessment of each Braden subscale is necessary for pressure ulcer prevention. We recommend the implementation of strategies for early identification of patients at risk at local and national levels. Summary statement: What is already known about the topic? Pressure ulcers/injuries are one of the most harmful events that can occur in the hospital context.Early identification of patients at risk is one of the key steps in pressure ulcer/injury prevention.Risk‐assessment tools, such as Braden Scale, support health care professionals to assess the risk of pressure ulcer development. What this paper adds? Five different pressure ulcer risk profiles in surgical, medical and orthopaedic hospital wards were identified.An increasing awareness of health care professionals is needed, to dedicate the proper attention to patients with high and low risk of pressure ulcer development.Although patients can be identified as at low or high risk of developing pressure ulcers, different patterns were identified among these two risk rankings. This reinforces that the subscales should be taken into account by health care professionals when assessing risk, in order to provide and develop better suited intervention plans. The implications of this paper: The classification of low risk of pressure ulcer development may misguide the early identification of patients with important individual risk factors.The early identification of at‐risk patients should be developed, rather more than relying on risk assessment tools. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]