-
Journal of Tissue Viability May 2019The European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, the Pan Pacific Pressure Injury Alliance, and the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel are updating the 'Prevention and...
AIM
The European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, the Pan Pacific Pressure Injury Alliance, and the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel are updating the 'Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers: Clinical Practice Guideline' (CPG) in 2019. The aim of this contribution is to summarize and to discuss the guideline development protocol for the 2019 update.
METHODS
A guideline governance group determines and monitors all steps of the CPG development. An international survey of consumers will be undertaken to establish consumer needs and interests. Systematic evidence searches in relevant electronic databases cover the period from July 2013 through August 2018. Risk of bias of included studies will be assessed by two reviewers using established checklists and an overall strength of evidence assigned to the cumulative body of evidence. Small working groups review the evidence available for each topic, review and/or draft the guideline chapters and recommendations and/or good practice statements. Finally, strength of recommendation grades are assigned. The recommendations are rated based on their importance and their potential to improve individual patient outcomes using an international formal consensus process.
DISCUSSION
Major methodological advantages of the current revision are a clear distinction between evidence-based recommendations and good practice statements and strong consumer involvement.
CONCLUSION
The 2019 guideline update builds on the previous 2014 version to ensure consistency and comparability. Methodology changes will improve the guideline quality to increase clarity and to enhance implementation and compliance. The full guideline development protocol can be accessed from the guideline website (http://www.internationalguideline.com/).
Topics: Clinical Protocols; Congresses as Topic; Europe; Guidelines as Topic; Humans; Pressure Ulcer
PubMed: 30658878
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtv.2019.01.001 -
Journal of the American Academy of... Oct 2019Though preventable in most cases, pressure ulcers continue to pose a major burden to the individual and society, affecting ≤3 million adults annually in the United...
Though preventable in most cases, pressure ulcers continue to pose a major burden to the individual and society, affecting ≤3 million adults annually in the United States alone. Despite increased national attention over the past 20 years, the prevalence of pressure ulcers has largely remained unchanged, while the associated costs of care continue to increase. Dermatologists can play a significant role in pressure ulcer prevention by becoming aware of at-risk populations and implementing suitable preventive strategies. Moreover, dermatologists should be able to recognize early changes that occur before skin breakdown and to properly identify and stage pressure ulcers to prevent delay of appropriate care. The aim of the first article in this continuing medical education series is to discuss the pathophysiology, risk factors, epidemiology, social and economic burdens, and clinical presentation of pressure ulcers.
Topics: Humans; Pressure Ulcer; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors
PubMed: 30664905
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2018.12.069 -
British Journal of Community Nursing Dec 2019Pressure ulcer/injury remains a significant health problem in the community, requiring comprehensive care. Nurses are involved in the management and prevention of... (Review)
Review
Pressure ulcer/injury remains a significant health problem in the community, requiring comprehensive care. Nurses are involved in the management and prevention of pressure injury. However, to date, studies focusing on applying nursing theory to pressure ulcer care have been limited. In the present study, the three dimensions of Lydia Hall's 1964 theory-core, care and cure-are extensively discussed and linked with the practice of pressure injury management. It is hoped that this review will help community nurses understand the application of this nursing theory to the prevention and management of pressure injury.
Topics: Community Health Nursing; Humans; Nursing Theory; Pressure Ulcer
PubMed: 31804885
DOI: 10.12968/bjcn.2019.24.Sup12.S38 -
Journal of Tissue Viability Aug 2020There has been an ongoing debate in the healthcare community about what pressure ulcers/injuries are, and how to name, define and classify them. The aim of this... (Review)
Review
There has been an ongoing debate in the healthcare community about what pressure ulcers/injuries are, and how to name, define and classify them. The aim of this discussion paper is to provide a brief theoretical background about pressure ulcer/injury classification, to explain the approach the Guideline Governance Group has taken during the 2019 update of the International Guideline for 'Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers/Injuries' and to share views on how to best implement pressure ulcer/injury classification. First formal pressure ulcer/injury classifications were introduced in the 1950s and today various pressure ulcer/injury classification systems are used worldwide. Dissimilarities between commonly used classification systems may be considered a limitation that impedes clinical and scientific communication. However, the conceptual meaning of pressure ulcer/injury categories described within the various classification systems is comparable and the current evidence does not indicate that one classification is superior to another. Therefore, the Guideline Governance Group created a crosswalk of the major pressure ulcer/injury classifications in common use across different geographic regions. Clinicians are encouraged to use the classification system adopted by their healthcare setting in the most consistent way. The validity of pressure ulcer/injury classification is closely linked to its intended purpose. Studying measurement properties of pressure ulcer/injury classification systems must follow state-of-the-art methods. Structured educational interventions are helpful for improving diagnostic accuracy and reducing misclassification of pressure ulcers/injuries. Implementation of innovative skin and soft tissue assessments and revised pressure ulcer/injury classifications are only worth implementing, when the diagnostic information improves clinical care.
Topics: Humans; Internationality; Pressure Ulcer; Severity of Illness Index
PubMed: 32414554
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtv.2020.04.003 -
Annals of Surgery Apr 2020Pressure injury is seen across all healthcare settings and affects people of any age and health condition. It imposes a significant burden, with annual costs of up to... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pressure injury is seen across all healthcare settings and affects people of any age and health condition. It imposes a significant burden, with annual costs of up to $17.8 billion in the United States alone. Despite considerable resources it exhausts, the disease remains very prevalent, and the incidence is on the rise. This is in part due to aging population, growing number of nursing home residents, poorly understood biology, and dismal track record of clinical research in this field.
METHODS
In our Review Article, we discuss the disease pathophysiology, clinical manifestation, evidence based recommendations for risk assessment, prevention and timely management, existing challenges, and directions to improve research on the field. This article encompasses dedicated sections on the full spectrum of the pressure related pathologies including "conventional pressure ulcers", "medical device related pressure injuries", "pressure injuries in mucosal membranes", "pressure injuries in pediatric population", "pressure injury at end of life", and the "role of pressure in pathogenesis of diabetic foot ulcers".
Topics: Humans; Incidence; Pressure Ulcer; Prevalence; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; United States
PubMed: 31460882
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003567 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2015Pressure ulcers (i.e. bedsores, pressure sores, pressure injuries, decubitus ulcers) are areas of localised damage to the skin and underlying tissue. They are common in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pressure ulcers (i.e. bedsores, pressure sores, pressure injuries, decubitus ulcers) are areas of localised damage to the skin and underlying tissue. They are common in the elderly and immobile, and costly in financial and human terms. Pressure-relieving support surfaces (i.e. beds, mattresses, seat cushions etc) are used to help prevent ulcer development.
OBJECTIVES
This systematic review seeks to establish:(1) the extent to which pressure-relieving support surfaces reduce the incidence of pressure ulcers compared with standard support surfaces, and,(2) their comparative effectiveness in ulcer prevention.
SEARCH METHODS
In April 2015, for this fourth update we searched The Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 15 April 2015) which includes the results of regular searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL and The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 3).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials, published or unpublished, that assessed the effects of any support surface for prevention of pressure ulcers, in any patient group or setting which measured pressure ulcer incidence. Trials reporting only proxy outcomes (e.g. interface pressure) were excluded. Two review authors independently selected trials.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data were extracted by one review author and checked by another. Where appropriate, estimates from similar trials were pooled for meta-analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
For this fourth update six new trials were included, bringing the total of included trials to 59.Foam alternatives to standard hospital foam mattresses reduce the incidence of pressure ulcers in people at risk (RR 0.40 95% CI 0.21 to 0.74). The relative merits of alternating- and constant low-pressure devices are unclear. One high-quality trial suggested that alternating-pressure mattresses may be more cost effective than alternating-pressure overlays in a UK context.Pressure-relieving overlays on the operating table reduce postoperative pressure ulcer incidence, although two trials indicated that foam overlays caused adverse skin changes. Meta-analysis of three trials suggest that Australian standard medical sheepskins prevent pressure ulcers (RR 0.56 95% CI 0.32 to 0.97).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
People at high risk of developing pressure ulcers should use higher-specification foam mattresses rather than standard hospital foam mattresses. The relative merits of higher-specification constant low-pressure and alternating-pressure support surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers are unclear, but alternating-pressure mattresses may be more cost effective than alternating-pressure overlays in a UK context. Medical grade sheepskins are associated with a decrease in pressure ulcer development. Organisations might consider the use of some forms of pressure relief for high risk patients in the operating theatre.
Topics: Bedding and Linens; Beds; Humans; Pressure Ulcer; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26333288
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001735.pub5 -
British Journal of Nursing (Mark Allen... Jun 2022Pressure ulcers are debilitating and often painful problem, particularly in people who are elderly, immobile and/or obese. It is estimated that more than 100 000 new...
Pressure ulcers are debilitating and often painful problem, particularly in people who are elderly, immobile and/or obese. It is estimated that more than 100 000 new pressure ulcers develop each year. These wounds are caused by friction and shear and are particularly prevalent in older people, where malnutrition can be a factor in their development. Nutrition plays a key role in pressure ulcer care because wounds need both macronutrients and micronutrients to heal. It is essential that nurses understand the role of nutrition in pressure ulcer management.
Topics: Aged; Humans; Malnutrition; Nutritional Status; Pressure Ulcer; Wound Healing
PubMed: 35736848
DOI: 10.12968/bjon.2022.31.12.S26 -
Journal of Wound Care Sep 2020The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effects of different repositioning regimens on pressure ulcer (PU) incidence in at-risk adult individuals without... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effects of different repositioning regimens on pressure ulcer (PU) incidence in at-risk adult individuals without existing PUs.
METHOD
Using systematic review methodology, randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster-RCTs, prospective non-RCTs, pre-post-studies and interrupted-time-series studies were considered. Specifically explored was the impact of the frequency of repositioning, use of repositioning systems and use of turning teams. The search was conducted in January 2019, using PubMed, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Cochrane and EMBASE databases. Data were extracted using a pre-designed extraction tool and analysis was undertaken using RevMan.
RESULTS
A total of 530 records were returned, of which 16 met the inclusion criteria. Half of studies were conducted in intensive care units (50%). The mean sample size was 629±604 participants. Frequency of repositioning was explored in nine studies. PU incidence was 8% (n=221/2834) for repositioning every 2-3 hours, versus 13% (n=398/3050) for repositioning every 4-6 hours. The odds ratio (OR) was 0.75 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.61-0.90, p=0.03), suggesting that there is a 25% reduction in the odds of PU development in favour of more frequent repositioning. Use of a repositioning system was explored in three studies. PU incidence was 2% (17/865) for the repositioning system, versus 5.5% (51/926) for care without using the repositioning system. The OR was 0.26 (95% CI: 0.05-1.29, p=0.10); this finding was not statistically significant. Use of a turning team was explored in two studies. PU incidence was 11% (n=22/200) with use of a turning team versus 20% (n=40/200) for usual care. The OR was 0.49 (95% CI: 0.27-0.86, p=0.01) suggesting that there is a 51% reduction in the odds of PU development in favour of use of a turning team. Using GRADE appraisal, the certainty of the evidence was assessed as low.
CONCLUSION
The results of this systematic review indicate that more frequent repositioning and use of a turning team reduce PU incidence. However, given the low certainty of evidence, results should be interpreted with caution.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Moving and Lifting Patients; Pressure Ulcer
PubMed: 32924821
DOI: 10.12968/jowc.2020.29.9.496 -
Medicina Intensiva 2017Pressure ulcers represent a significant problem for patients, professionals and health systems. Their reported incidence and prevalence are significant worldwide. Their... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Pressure ulcers represent a significant problem for patients, professionals and health systems. Their reported incidence and prevalence are significant worldwide. Their character iatrogenic states that its appearance is preventable and its incidence is an indicator of scientific and technical quality both in primary care and specialized care. The aim of this review was to identify risk factors associated with the occurrence of pressure ulcers in critically ill patients.
METHODOLOGY
The PRISMA Declaration recommendations have been followed and adapted to studies identifying risk factors. A qualitative systematic review of primary studies has been performed and a search was conducted of the PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Scopus and Web of Science databases. Methodological limitations in observational studies have been considered.
RESULTS
From 200 references, 17 fulfilled the eligibility criteria. These studies included 19,363 patients admitted to intensive care units. Six studies were classified as high quality and 11 were classified as moderate quality. Risk factors that emerged as predictive of pressure ulcers development more frequently included age, length of ICU stay, diabetes, time of MAP <60-70mmHg, mechanical ventilation, length of mechanical ventilation, intermittent haemodialysis or continuous veno-venous haemofiltration therapy, vasopressor support, sedation and turning.
CONCLUSIONS
There is no single factors which can explain the occurrence of pressure ulcers. Rather, it is an interplay of factors that increase the probability of its development.
Topics: Critical Illness; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Pressure Ulcer; Risk Factors
PubMed: 27780589
DOI: 10.1016/j.medin.2016.09.003 -
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