-
International Wound Journal Aug 2023In most health care centres, pressure ulcers (PUs) are a common concern. This systematic review aimed to summarise nurses' practice and related factors toward PU... (Review)
Review
In most health care centres, pressure ulcers (PUs) are a common concern. This systematic review aimed to summarise nurses' practice and related factors toward PU prevention. An extensive search was conducted on electronic databases such as Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, Iranmedex, and Scientific Information Database via keywords extracted from Medical Subject Headings such as "Pressure ulcer", "Pressure sore", "Bedsore", "Practice", and "Nurses" from the earliest to 9 March 2022. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the appraisal tool for cross-sectional studies (AXIS tool). Data extraction and quality assessment of included studies were performed by two researchers independently. A total of 6501 nurses were enrolled in twenty-nine studies. Of the participants, 75.15% were female and 55.64% were single, and 94.57% had a bachelor of science in nursing degree. Mean age and work experience of nurses was 30.69 (SD = 4.73) and 8.61 (SD = 5.44) years, respectively. The mean score of nurses' practices toward the prevention of PUs was 57.58 (SD = 14.62) out of 100. Also, 48.95% of nurses had a desirable practice toward the prevention of PUs. Factors such as knowledge (n = 6), attitude (n = 4), level of education (n = 4), a history of participating in workshops related to the prevention of PUs (n = 3), work experience (n = 2), area of practice (n = 2), self-adequacy (n = 1), follow the literature (n = 1), age (n = 1), and involvement in research (n = 1) had a significant positive relationship with nurses' practice toward PUs prevention. However, the nurses practice of PUs prevention had a significant negative relationship with lack of job satisfaction (n = 1), disproportionate nurse-to-patient ratio (n = 1), and lack of policies and guidelines (n = 1). The level of nurses' practice toward the prevention of PUs was relatively desirable. The result of this study can help improve the practice of nurses toward PUs prevention. Increasing nurses' knowledge and attitude toward PUs prevention can improve their practice. Therefore, it is suggested that policymakers and nursing managers implement PUs prevention education for nurses based on the factors associated with nurses' practice.
Topics: Humans; Female; Male; Ulcer; Cross-Sectional Studies; Clinical Competence; Pressure Ulcer; Nurses; Suppuration; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 36543328
DOI: 10.1111/iwj.14062 -
Diabetes/metabolism Research and Reviews Jan 2016Prevention of foot ulcers in patients with diabetes is extremely important to help reduce the enormous burden of foot ulceration on both patient and health resources. A... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Prevention of foot ulcers in patients with diabetes is extremely important to help reduce the enormous burden of foot ulceration on both patient and health resources. A comprehensive analysis of reported interventions is not currently available, but is needed to better inform caregivers about effective prevention. The aim of this systematic review is to investigate the effectiveness of interventions to prevent first and recurrent foot ulcers in persons with diabetes who are at risk for ulceration.
METHODS
The available medical scientific literature in PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane database was searched for original research studies on preventative interventions. Both controlled and non-controlled studies were selected. Data from controlled studies were assessed for methodological quality by two independent reviewers.
RESULTS
From the identified records, a total of 30 controlled studies (of which 19 RCTs) and another 44 non-controlled studies were assessed and described. Few controlled studies, of generally low to moderate quality, were identified on the prevention of a first foot ulcer. For the prevention of recurrent plantar foot ulcers, multiple RCTs with low risk of bias show the benefit for the use of daily foot skin temperature measurements and consequent preventative actions, as well as for therapeutic footwear that demonstrates to relieve plantar pressure and that is worn by the patient. To prevent recurrence, some evidence exists for integrated foot care when it includes a combination of professional foot treatment, therapeutic footwear and patient education; for just a single session of patient education, no evidence exists. Surgical interventions can be effective in selected patients, but the evidence base is small.
CONCLUSION
The evidence base to support the use of specific self-management and footwear interventions for the prevention of recurrent plantar foot ulcers is quite strong, but is small for the use of other, sometimes widely applied, interventions and is practically nonexistent for the prevention of a first foot ulcer and non-plantar foot ulcer.
Topics: Combined Modality Therapy; Cost of Illness; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Foot; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Patient Compliance; Patient Education as Topic; Precision Medicine; Recurrence; Risk Factors; Self Care; Shoes
PubMed: 26340966
DOI: 10.1002/dmrr.2701 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2022Pressure ulcers (PUs) are an indicator of the quality of nursing care and nurses can prevent PUs well if they have sufficient knowledge. Numerous studies in this field... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Pressure ulcers (PUs) are an indicator of the quality of nursing care and nurses can prevent PUs well if they have sufficient knowledge. Numerous studies in this field have reported different results. The aim of this study was to estimate the pooled score of nurses' knowledge about PU prevention based on the Pressure Ulcer Knowledge Assessment Tool (PUKAT).
METHODS
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, databases including Web of Science, ScienceDirect, PubMed, and Scopus were searched. All studies published in English between 2011 and 2022 that reported the status of nurses' knowledge of PU prevention based on PUKAT were included in the analysis. Based on heterogeneity between the studies, the data were analyzed using a random effects model.
RESULTS
The pooled scores of PU prevention knowledge in nurses and nursing students were (51.5%; 95% CI: 45.8-57.2%) and (48.9%; 95% CI: 42.5-55.2%), respectively. As the age of the participants increased, the pooled score of pressure ulcer prevention knowledge increased significantly ( = 0.028). The publication bias was not significant. The highest and lowest knowledge scores in nurses and nursing students were related to the fourth dimension (nutrition) and the fifth dimension (preventive measures to reduce the amount of pressure/shear), respectively.
CONCLUSION
Knowledge of nurses and nursing students about PU prevention is insufficient. Providing regular training to nurses and including the principles of PU prevention in the curriculum of nursing students to improve their knowledge seems necessary.
Topics: Clinical Competence; Curriculum; Humans; Pressure Ulcer; Students, Nursing; Suppuration
PubMed: 36159260
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.964680 -
Nursing Open Sep 2021Pressure injuries are common adverse events in clinical practice, affecting the well-being of patients and causing considerable financial burden to healthcare systems.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
Pressure injuries are common adverse events in clinical practice, affecting the well-being of patients and causing considerable financial burden to healthcare systems. It is therefore essential to use reliable assessment tools to identify pressure injuries for early prevention. The Braden Scale is a widely used tool to assess pressure injury risk, but the literature is currently lacking in determining its accuracy. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the Braden Scale in assessing pressure injury risk.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
Articles published between 1973-2020 from periodicals indexed in the PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library were selected. Two reviewers independently selected the relevant studies for inclusion. Data were analysed by the STATA 15.0 and the RevMan 5.3 software.
RESULTS
In total, 60 studies involving 49,326 individuals were eligible for this meta-analysis. The pooled SEN, SPE, PLR, NLR, DOR and AUC were 0.78 (95% CI: 0.74 to 0.82), 0.72 (95% CI: 0.66 to 0.78), 2.80 (95% CI: 2.30 to 3.50), 0.30 (95% CI: 0.26 to 0.35), 9.00 (95% CI: 7.00 to 13.00) and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.79 to 0.85), respectively. Subgroup analyses indicated that the AUC was higher for prospective design (0.84, 95% CI: 0.81 to 0.87), mean age <60 years (0.87, 95% CI: 0.84 to 0.90), hospital (0.82, 95% CI: 0.79 to 0.86) and Caucasian population (0.86, 95% CI: 0.82 to 0.88). In addition, 18 was found to be the optimal cut-off value.
CONCLUSION
The evidence indicated that the Braden Scale had a moderate predictive validity. It was more suitable for mean age <60 years, hospitalized patients and the Caucasian population, and the cut-off value of 18 might be used for the risk assessment of pressure injuries in clinical practice. However, due to the different cut-off values used among included studies, the results had a significant heterogeneity. Future studies should explore the optimal cut-off value in the same clinical environment.
Topics: Adult; Crush Injuries; Humans; Middle Aged; Pressure Ulcer; Prospective Studies; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 33630407
DOI: 10.1002/nop2.792 -
International Journal of Nursing Studies Nov 2015Pressure ulcers impose a substantial financial burden. The need for high-quality health care while expenditures are constrained entails the interest to calculate the... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Pressure ulcers impose a substantial financial burden. The need for high-quality health care while expenditures are constrained entails the interest to calculate the cost of preventing and treating pressure ulcers and their impact on patients, healthcare, and society.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this paper is to provide insight into the cost of pressure ulcer prevention and treatment in an adult population.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was performed to conform the Cochrane Collaboration guidelines for systematic reviews. The search strategy contained index terms and key words related to pressure ulcers and cost. The search was performed in Medline, CINAHL, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, Embase, and EconLit covering articles up to September 2013. Reference lists and conference abstracts were screened. Articles were eligible if they reported on direct medical cost of pressure ulcer prevention or treatment, and provided national cost estimates, cost per patient, or cost per patient per day. The Consensus on Health Economic Criteria checklist was used to assess methodological quality of the included studies.
RESULTS
In total, 2542 records were retrieved. After assessing eligibility, 17 articles were included. Five articles reported on both the cost of prevention and treatment, three articles reported on cost of prevention, and nine articles reported on the cost of pressure ulcer treatment. All articles were published between 2001 and 2013. Cost of pressure ulcer prevention per patient per day varied between 2.65 € to 87.57 € across all settings. Cost of pressure ulcer treatment per patient per day ranged from 1.71 € to 470.49 € across different settings. The methodological heterogeneity among studies was considerable, and encompassed differences regarding type of health economic design, perspective, cost components, and health outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
Cost of pressure ulcer prevention and treatment differed considerable between studies. Although the cost to provide pressure ulcer prevention to patients at risk can importantly impact health care services' budgets, the costs to treat a severe pressure ulcer were found to be substantially higher. Methodological heterogeneity among studies identified the need to use available, and study design-specific methodological guidelines to conduct health economic studies, and the need for additional pressure ulcer specific recommendations.
Topics: Cost of Illness; Humans; Pressure Ulcer
PubMed: 26231383
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.06.006 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2015Honey is a viscous, supersaturated sugar solution derived from nectar gathered and modified by the honeybee, Apis mellifera. Honey has been used since ancient times as a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Honey is a viscous, supersaturated sugar solution derived from nectar gathered and modified by the honeybee, Apis mellifera. Honey has been used since ancient times as a remedy in wound care. Evidence from animal studies and some trials has suggested that honey may accelerate wound healing.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this review was to assess the effects of honey compared with alternative wound dressings and topical treatments on the of healing of acute (e.g. burns, lacerations) and/or chronic (e.g. venous ulcers) wounds.
SEARCH METHODS
For this update of the review we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 15 October 2014); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 9); Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to October Week 1 2014); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations 13 October 2014); Ovid EMBASE (1974 to 13 October 2014); and EBSCO CINAHL (1982 to 15 October 2014).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised and quasi-randomised trials that evaluated honey as a treatment for any sort of acute or chronic wound were sought. There was no restriction in terms of source, date of publication or language. Wound healing was the primary endpoint.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data from eligible trials were extracted and summarised by one review author, using a data extraction sheet, and independently verified by a second review author. All data have been subsequently checked by two more authors.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 26 eligible trials (total of 3011 participants). Three trials evaluated the effects of honey in minor acute wounds, 11 trials evaluated honey in burns, 10 trials recruited people with different chronic wounds including two in people with venous leg ulcers, two trials in people with diabetic foot ulcers and single trials in infected post-operative wounds, pressure injuries, cutaneous Leishmaniasis and Fournier's gangrene. Two trials recruited a mixed population of people with acute and chronic wounds. The quality of the evidence varied between different comparisons and outcomes. We mainly downgraded the quality of evidence for risk of bias, imprecision and, in a few cases, inconsistency.There is high quality evidence (2 trials, n=992) that honey dressings heal partial thickness burns more quickly than conventional dressings (WMD -4.68 days, 95%CI -5.09 to -4.28) but it is unclear if there is a difference in rates of adverse events (very low quality evidence) or infection (low quality evidence).There is very low quality evidence (4 trials, n=332) that burns treated with honey heal more quickly than those treated with silver sulfadiazine (SSD) (WMD -5.12 days, 95%CI -9.51 to -0.73) and high quality evidence from 6 trials (n=462) that there is no difference in overall risk of healing within 6 weeks for honey compared with SSD (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.02) but a reduction in the overall risk of adverse events with honey relative to SSD. There is low quality evidence (1 trial, n=50) that early excision and grafting heals partial and full thickness burns more quickly than honey followed by grafting as necessary (WMD 13.6 days, 95%CI 9.82 to 17.38).There is low quality evidence (2 trials, different comparators, n=140) that honey heals a mixed population of acute and chronic wounds more quickly than SSD or sugar dressings.Honey healed infected post-operative wounds more quickly than antiseptic washes followed by gauze and was associated with fewer adverse events (1 trial, n=50, moderate quality evidence, RR of healing 1.69, 95%CI 1.10 to 2.61); healed pressure ulcers more quickly than saline soaks (1 trial, n= 40, very low quality evidence, RR 1.41, 95%CI 1.05 to 1.90), and healed Fournier's gangrene more quickly than Eusol soaks (1 trial, n=30, very low quality evidence, WMD -8.00 days, 95%CI -6.08 to -9.92 days).The effects of honey relative to comparators are unclear for: venous leg ulcers (2 trials, n= 476, low quality evidence); minor acute wounds (3 trials, n=213, very low quality evidence); diabetic foot ulcers (2 trials, n=93, low quality evidence); Leishmaniasis (1 trial, n=100, low quality evidence); mixed chronic wounds (2 trials, n=150, low quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
It is difficult to draw overall conclusions regarding the effects of honey as a topical treatment for wounds due to the heterogeneous nature of the patient populations and comparators studied and the mostly low quality of the evidence. The quality of the evidence was mainly downgraded for risk of bias and imprecision. Honey appears to heal partial thickness burns more quickly than conventional treatment (which included polyurethane film, paraffin gauze, soframycin-impregnated gauze, sterile linen and leaving the burns exposed) and infected post-operative wounds more quickly than antiseptics and gauze. Beyond these comparisons any evidence for differences in the effects of honey and comparators is of low or very low quality and does not form a robust basis for decision making.
Topics: Administration, Topical; Apitherapy; Burns; Honey; Humans; Leg Ulcer; Pressure Ulcer; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Surgical Wound Infection; Varicose Ulcer; Wound Healing; Wounds and Injuries
PubMed: 25742878
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005083.pub4 -
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Jul 2021The role of nutritional intervention in wound care has been a topic of controversy. Although the efficacy of macronutrient supplementation has been well described, there...
BACKGROUND
The role of nutritional intervention in wound care has been a topic of controversy. Although the efficacy of macronutrient supplementation has been well described, there is a paucity of evidence and no official recommendation regarding the use of vitamins and minerals to optimize wound healing. This is the first review of vitamin and mineral wound intervention that systematically summarizes the literature using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and distills the evidence by wound type.
METHODS
In this comprehensive review, the authors outline the nutrients and delivery methods used in the identified studies, analyze reported treatment outcomes, summarize nutrient effectiveness, and propose evidence-based conclusions to improve wound healing outcomes and enhance the consistency of nutritional intervention in wound care.
RESULTS
Thirty-six studies with a combined total of 2339 patients investigated the use of oral, topical, or intravenous vitamin and/or mineral supplementation for treatment of the following wound types: burn wounds (n = 3), pressure ulcers (n = 7), diabetic ulcers (n = 4), venous ulcers (n = 7), digital ulcers (n = 1), skin incisions (n = 9), hypertrophic scars (n = 4), and sinonasal wounds (n = 1). Improved outcomes were reported in patients with burn wounds receiving vitamins A, B1, B6, B12, D, and E and zinc, calcium, copper, magnesium, selenium, and zinc; patients with pressure ulcers receiving vitamin C and zinc; patients with diabetic ulcers receiving vitamin A, B9, D, and E; patients with venous ulcers receiving zinc; and patients with hypertrophic scars receiving vitamin E.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the high-level data provided in this review, the use of specific nutritional interventions may improve the outcome of certain wound types. Further investigation is warranted to draw definitive conclusions.
Topics: Burns; Cicatrix, Hypertrophic; Humans; Nutritional Support; Paranasal Sinuses; Skin Ulcer; Trace Elements; Treatment Outcome; Vitamins; Wound Healing
PubMed: 34181622
DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000008061 -
International Journal of Nursing Studies Apr 2019To review observational studies reporting medical device-related pressure injuries and to identify the medical devices commonly associated with pressure injuries. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To review observational studies reporting medical device-related pressure injuries and to identify the medical devices commonly associated with pressure injuries.
DESIGN
A systematic review of primary research was undertaken, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines.
DATA SOURCES
A comprehensive electronic literature search of AMED, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, British Nursing Database and Google Scholar was conducted from inception to 31 December 2018. Studies that reported the prevalence or incidence of medical device-related pressure injuries and published in English language were included in the review.
REVIEW METHODS
The eligibility of studies was evaluated independently by three of the four authors and audited by an independent researcher. The titles and abstracts of all studies were screened to identify studies that met the inclusion criteria. Full-text articles of the remaining studies were obtained and screened against the inclusion criteria. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Meta-analysis was conducted using the 'metaprop' routine, with estimates of medical device-related pressure injuries from the included studies pooled using DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model. Meta-regression analysis was also conducted to examine between-study heterogeneity.
RESULTS
Twenty-nine studies (17 cross-sectional studies; 12 cohort studies) comprising data on 126,150 patients were eligible for inclusion in this review. The mean ages for patients were approximately 36.2 years (adults) and 5.9 years (children). The estimated pooled incidence and prevalence of medical device-related pressure injuries were 12% (95% CI 8-18) and 10% (95% CI 6-16) respectively. These results should be interpreted with caution given the high levels of heterogeneity observed between included studies. The commonly identified medical devices associated with the risk of developing medical device-related pressure injuries include respiratory devices, cervical collars, tubing devices, splints, and intravenous catheters.
CONCLUSIONS
Medical device-related pressure injuries are among key indicators of patient safety and nursing quality in healthcare facilities. This systematic review and meta-analysis provide up-to-date estimates of the extent and nature of medical device-related pressure injuries, and the findings suggest that device-related pressure injuries are a public health issue of significance, especially as these injuries affect patients' wellbeing and increase the cost of care for both patients and providers. Further research is required to inform strategies for increasing the reporting and risk assessment of medical device-related pressure injuries.
Topics: Equipment and Supplies; Humans; Incidence; Pressure Ulcer; Prevalence; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 30782513
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.02.006 -
Inquiry : a Journal of Medical Care... 2023Turning and repositioning is considered one of the strategies to reduce the incidence of pressure injuries (PIs) among hospitalized patients, as it helps to redistribute... (Review)
Review
Turning and repositioning is considered one of the strategies to reduce the incidence of pressure injuries (PIs) among hospitalized patients, as it helps to redistribute and minimize direct pressure on the targeted skin and enhance blood perfusion in the affected areas. The frequency of turning and repositioning is generally uniform across clinical settings, with most clinical guidelines recommending a substantial change in a patient's position according to their health status. Notably, the optimal time interval between the position changes has not yet been established. Therefore, this study aimed to review the current literature in relation to the frequency of turning and repositioning adult patients to prevent PIs. The author used a systematic review following Whittemore and Knafl's review strategy. The author used the following databases: CINAHL, Scopus, PubMed, ProQuest, Ovid, MedLine, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. During the search, Boolean logic operators, MeSH terms, and keywords were utilized. The researcher followed the Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-based Practice Grading Scale to evaluate the quality of selected studies. The search yielded 723 articles, of which 10 were included in this review. These 10 articles revealed several frequency intervals for comparison purposes: 2-hourly, 3-hourly, 4-hourly, and 6-hourly depending on the healthcare setting, with a combination of supine, 30° tilt, or 90° tilt. This review shows that the optimal frequency of turning and repositioning to prevent PIs remains unclear and further investigation is necessary. Considering the varying nature of clinical settings, there is a lack of clarity regarding a golden standard for the same. Therefore, patients' health conditions should be considered when choosing the proper frequency to prevent PIs.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Pressure Ulcer; Health Facilities; Incidence; Health Status; Hospitals
PubMed: 38050921
DOI: 10.1177/00469580231215209 -
Annals of Palliative Medicine Oct 2021Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is one of the new modality for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. In this article we will investigate the efficacy and safety... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is one of the new modality for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. In this article we will investigate the efficacy and safety of it by literature search and meta-analysis.
METHODS
The databases of PubMed, Embase, Ovid, and Cochrane library were selected as search platforms. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published after 2010 were searched with the keyword "vacuum-assisted closure therapy" OR "negative pressure wound therapy" OR "diabetic foot". The Cochrane Review Handbook was used to assess the bias of the literatures. The software RevMan 5.4 was used for analysis to obtain a forest plot and funnel plot.
RESULTS
In this study, 363 articles were initially screened, and 9 literatures were finally included, involving a total of 943 patients. Combined analysis using the fixed effects model showed that the healing rate of the NPWT group was significantly lower than the standard group [odds ratio (OR) =3.60, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.38 to 5.45, P<0.001]. The granulation tissue formation time of the NPWT group was significantly less than the standard group [mean difference (MD) =-8.95, 95% CI: -10.26 to -7.64, P<0.001]. The rate of adverse events of both groups showed no significant difference (OR =0.49, 95% CI: 0.10 to 2.42, P=0.38). The amputation rate of both groups showed no statistically significant (OR =0.33, 95% CI: 0.09 to 1.26, P=0.10) too.
DISCUSSION
Negative pressure wound therapy can effectively accelerate wound healing, it is equally safe with general routine treatment. However, the negative pressure value should be appropriately maintained and adjusted to avoid bleeding tendency of the wound when applying this new modality.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus; Diabetic Foot; Humans; Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy; Wound Healing
PubMed: 34763444
DOI: 10.21037/apm-21-2476