-
Journal of Tissue Viability May 2023To develop a systematic review on the prevalence and the incidence of pressure ulcers/injuries in adult patients in hospital emergency services. (Review)
Review
AIM
To develop a systematic review on the prevalence and the incidence of pressure ulcers/injuries in adult patients in hospital emergency services.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Systematic review of prevalence and incidence studies developed according to the Preferred Reporting Items Form Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols and the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. The inclusion criteria were based on the CoCoPop mnemonic. The main variables of interest were the "prevalence" and/or the "incidence" of "pressure ulcers/injuries" (Condition) reported in studies developed in hospital emergency services (Context) with adult participants (Population). The Systematic Review Protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CDR42021252906).
RESULTS
The pressure ulcer/injury (point) prevalence ranged from 5.2% (at admission) to 12.3% (at discharge) and the pressure ulcer/injury incidence ranged from 4.5% to 78.4%. Most of the pressure ulcers/injuries documented were category/stage I. The most problematic anatomical locations were the sacrococcygeal region and the heels. The preventive measures should be implemented as soon as possible and are important in patients older than 75 years, with multiple comorbidities, high C-Reative Protein levels, cervical spine immobilization, presented to hospital emergency service by ambulance or with hypotension at the time of admission.
CONCLUSIONS
The prevalence and incidence of pressure ulcers/injuries in hospital emergency services remains an understudied topic which could limit the generalization of our data. This systematic review highlighted that the management of pressure ulcers/injuries is a real and current challenge in hospital emergency services. It is important to identify the patients at (higher) risk to establish an (earlier) preventive care plan according to patients and emergency services' characteristics.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Cohort Studies; Crush Injuries; Emergency Service, Hospital; Hospitalization; Pressure Ulcer
PubMed: 36792441
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtv.2023.02.001 -
Heliyon Mar 2024Many clinical management strategies have been proposed to deal with diabetic foot ulcers. However, the occurrence and recurrence of foot ulcers remain the major problems...
Many clinical management strategies have been proposed to deal with diabetic foot ulcers. However, the occurrence and recurrence of foot ulcers remain the major problems for diabetics. This study aims to identify, visualize, and characterize the meta-analyses on diabetic foot ulcer research. Articles published online were retrieved from the Web of Science core collection database using a search query incorporating MeSH terms and topics related to diabetic foot ulcers and meta-analysis. The publications were then analyzed for basic characteristics, including publication year, countries, topics covered, references, and keywords discussed in the articles. Data visualization was performed using CiteSpace. 334 meta-analyses and systematic reviews on diabetic foot ulcers were identified. The number of publications has experienced rapid growth in recent years (nearly 6-fold since 2016). The United States, China, Netherlands, England, and Australia had a strong collaboration in the contribution of publication. 7 primary topics were summarized from the top 100 highly cited publications: #1 Interventions (proportion: 59%), #2 Risk factors and Prevention (22%), #3 Epidemiology analysis (6%), #4 Cost-effectiveness of interventions (5%), #5 Long-term prognosis (3%), #6 Quality of life analysis (3%), and #7 Economic burden analysis (2%). Footwear and offloading interventions, multidisciplinary care, hyperbaric oxygen, platelet-rich plasma, and negative pressure wound therapies are highly regarded in terms of intervention. Diabetic foot osteomyelitis, peripheral diabetic neuropathy, chronic limb-threatening ischemia, and infections are the main comorbidities. In recent years, offloading interventions, debridement, telemedicine, long-term prognosis, and economic burden analyses have gradually received attention. Individualized treatment, multidisciplinary collaboration, quality of life considerations, and economic burden analyses are the long-term concerns.
PubMed: 38496839
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e27534 -
Journal of Tissue Viability Nov 2022To systematically evaluate the incidence of pressure injuries (PIs) in hospitalized fracture patients and to provide evidence for the prevention and treatment of PIs. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To systematically evaluate the incidence of pressure injuries (PIs) in hospitalized fracture patients and to provide evidence for the prevention and treatment of PIs.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL, China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database (CNKI), WanFang Database, Weipu Database (VIP), and Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM) were searched to collect cross-sectional studies and cohort studies related to PIs among hospitalized fracture patients. All electronic literature sources were searched from inception to March 2022, and a hand-search through references was also conducted to find relevant articles. Studies were evaluated independently by two researchers and audited by a third researcher. The data were extracted and presented in tables. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Checklist. All data analysis used Stata14.0. The I statistic and random-effects model were used to determine the heterogeneity.
RESULTS
A total of 7906 articles were screened, and 18 studies with 8956 patients were ultimately involved in this review. The pooled incidence of PIs in the fracture patients was 20.4% (95%CI: 14.9 to 25.8), and the incidence of PIs only in spinal and hip fracture patients was 23.9% (95%CI: 19.6 to 28.2). The incidence of PIs in 65 years old or over was significantly high (23.3% [95%CI: 15.3 to 31.2]). The most affected body sites were sacrococcygeal regions (56.7%) and heels (19.9%). The most common stages were stage 2 (62.2%) and stage 1 (17.4%).
CONCLUSION
The overall incidence of PIs in fracture patients was as high as 20.4%, significantly higher than the average incidence of adults. We found that the potential for PIs in fracture patients increases with age. Hence, our discoveries recommended that healthcare givers should consider reducing the occurrence of PIs. Additionally, more research may be conducted to improve the understanding of characteristics of PIs among fracture patients and to identify PIs risk factors to prevent and treat them effectively.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Humans; China; Cross-Sectional Studies; Crush Injuries; Incidence; Risk Factors; Pressure Ulcer
PubMed: 36109261
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtv.2022.08.006 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2022Sitting can be viewed as a therapeutic intervention and an important part of a person's recovery process; but the risk of ulceration must be mitigated. Interventions for... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Sitting can be viewed as a therapeutic intervention and an important part of a person's recovery process; but the risk of ulceration must be mitigated. Interventions for ulcer prevention in those at risk from prolonged sitting include the use of specialist cushions and surfaces, especially for wheelchair users. Whilst there is interest in the effects of different pressure redistributing cushions for wheelchairs, the benefits of pressure redistributing static chairs, compared with standard chairs, for pressure ulcer development in at-risk people are not clear.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of pressure redistributing static chairs on the prevention of pressure ulcers in health, rehabilitation and social care settings, and places of residence in which people may spend their day.
SEARCH METHODS
In June 2021 we searched the following electronic databases to identify reports of relevant randomised clinical trials: the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature). We also searched clinical trials registers for ongoing and unpublished studies, and reference lists of relevant systematic reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports. There were no restrictions by language, date of publication or study setting.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We sought to include published or unpublished randomised controlled trials that assessed pressure redistributing static chairs in the prevention or management of pressure ulcers.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently performed study selection. We planned that two review authors would also assess the risk of bias, extract study data and assess the certainty of evidence according to GRADE methodology.
MAIN RESULTS
We did not identify any studies that met the review eligibility criteria, nor any registered studies investigating the role of pressure redistributing static chairs in the prevention or management of pressure ulcers.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Currently, there is no randomised evidence that supports or refutes the role of pressure redistributing static chairs in the prevention or management of pressure ulcers. This is a priority area and there is a need to explore this intervention with rigorous and robust research.
Topics: Bedding and Linens; Beds; Bias; Humans; Pressure Ulcer
PubMed: 35174477
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013644.pub2 -
Wound Repair and Regeneration :... May 2021The wound microbiome may play an important role in the wound healing process. We conducted the first systematic prognosis review investigating whether aspects of the... (Review)
Review
The wound microbiome may play an important role in the wound healing process. We conducted the first systematic prognosis review investigating whether aspects of the wound microbiome are independent prognostic factors for the healing of complex wounds. We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library to February 2019. We included longitudinal studies which assessed the independent association of aspects of wound microbiome with healing of complex wounds while controlling for confounding factors. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. We synthesised studies narratively due to the clinical and methodological heterogeneity of included studies and sparse data. We identified 28 cohorts from 21 studies with a total of 38,604 participants, including people with diabetes and foot ulcers, open surgical wounds, venous leg ulcers and pressure ulcers. Risk of bias varied from low (2 cohorts) to high (17 cohorts); the great majority of participants were in cohorts at high risk of bias. Most evidence related to the association of baseline clinical wound infection with healing. Clinical infection at baseline may be associated with less likelihood of wound healing in foot ulcers in diabetes (HR from cohort with moderate risk of bias 0.53, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.83) or slower healing in open surgical wounds (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.83); evidence in other wounds is more limited. Most other associations assessed showed no clear relationship with wound healing; evidence was limited and often sparse; and we documented gaps in the evidence. There is low certainty evidence that a diagnosis of wound infection may be prognostic of poorer healing in foot ulcers in diabetes, and some moderate certainty evidence for this in open surgical wounds. Low certainty evidence means that more research could change these findings.
Topics: Bacteria; Humans; Prognosis; Surgical Wound; Varicose Ulcer; Wound Healing
PubMed: 33591630
DOI: 10.1111/wrr.12898 -
Journal of Wound Care Sep 2023The aim of this systematic review was to critically appraise and synthesise the existing research literature pertaining to nurses' attitudes toward pressure ulcer (PU)...
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this systematic review was to critically appraise and synthesise the existing research literature pertaining to nurses' attitudes toward pressure ulcer (PU) prevention.
METHOD
The systematic review presented in our paper serves as an updated version of the definitive review conducted by Avsar et al. in 2019. Using systematic review methodology, we considered published quantitative studies focusing on nurses' attitudes toward PU prevention as measured using psychometric tests. The search was conducted in April 2022, using PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane and EMBASE databases, and returned 454 records, of which 35 met the inclusion criteria. Data were extracted using a pre-designed extraction tool and all included studies were quality appraised using the evidence-based librarianship (EBL) appraisal checklist.
RESULTS
In most studies, distinct measurement instruments were used for measuring nurses' attitudes toward the prevention of PUs: the Moore and Price Attitude Scale and the Attitude towards Pressure Ulcer Prevention Instrument (APuP). In this first update, the mean attitude score was 69% (±14%, range: 33.6-89%). A separate analysis of the new studies alone included in this first update (n=14) indicated a mean attitude score of 62.25% (±17.9%; median: 14%), suggesting a 10.75% lower mean attitude score. In total, 46% (n=16) yielded a score ≥75%. Conversely, Avsar et al. in 2019, 86% (n=18) of studies yielded positive attitude results. Studies from the Middle East show the lowest mean attitude score (mean 55%; ±15%; median 53%; n=9), with studies from Europe displaying the highest mean attitude score (mean 79%; ±6%; median 79%; n=12).
CONCLUSION
The findings suggest that, overall, nurses are relatively positively disposed toward PU prevention. However, there are differences across continents. It is important to highlight also that the nurses have difficulties reflecting this positive attitude into actual preventative strategies.
Topics: Humans; Pressure Ulcer; Databases, Factual; Europe; Attitude; Nurses
PubMed: 37682786
DOI: 10.12968/jowc.2023.32.9.544 -
Journal of Tissue Viability Feb 2021A recent global review of pressure ulcers contained no studies from Africa. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
A recent global review of pressure ulcers contained no studies from Africa.
OBJECTIVE
To identify the prevalence and incidence of pressure ulcers in Africa.
DATA SOURCES
Bibliographic databases, African specific databases, grey literature.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Studies with prevalence or incidence data of pressure ulcers from Africa since the year 2000.
PARTICIPANTS
Any age, including children, in any setting, specifically including hospital patients from any clinical area but not restricted to hospital settings.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
Hoy score for bias, Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Instrument.
METHOD
We followed the PRISMA guideline for systematic reviews. We searched Embase, Medline, Scopus, CINHAL, Google Scholar, specialist African databases and grey literature for studies reporting incidence or prevalence data.
RESULTS
Nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the study. Point prevalence rates varied from 3.4% to 18.6% for medical/surgical and other general hospital units with a pooled prevalence of 11%, for grades II-IV 5%. For spinal injury units the pooled prevalence was 44%.
LIMITATIONS
restricted to English, French and Arabic.
CONCLUSION
Prevalence of pressure ulcers in Africa reported here is similar to figures from a recent review of prevalence in Europe and two recent global reviews of hospitalised patients. Prevalence of pressure ulcers in spinal cord injury patients is similar to figures from a review of developing countries. The reporting of prevalence is lacking in detail in some studies. Studies using an observational design employing physical examination of patients showed higher prevalence than those relying on other methods such as medical notes or databases.
IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS
Further prevalence and incidence studies are needed in Africa. Reporting of such studies should ensure items in the "Checklist for Prevalence Studies" from Joanna Briggs Institute (or similar well regarded resources) are addressed and the PICOS model and PRISMA guidelines are employed.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER
Prospero registration number CRD42020180093.
Topics: Africa; Humans; Incidence; Pressure Ulcer; Prevalence
PubMed: 33129668
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtv.2020.10.003 -
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research Nov 2023Plantar ulcers are a leading complication of leprosy that requires frequent visits to hospital and is associated with stigma. The extent of burden of ulcers in leprosy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Plantar ulcers are a leading complication of leprosy that requires frequent visits to hospital and is associated with stigma. The extent of burden of ulcers in leprosy and its risk factors are scant impeding the development of targeted interventions to prevent and promote healing of ulcers. The aim of this review is to generate evidence on the prevalence of plantar ulcer and its risk factors in leprosy.
METHODS
Databases (Medline, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, BVS), conference abstracts and reference lists were searched for eligible studies. Studies were included that reported a point prevalence of plantar ulcer and/or its "risk factors" associated with development of ulcers (either causatively or predictively), including individual level, disease related and bio-mechanical factors. We followed PRISMA guidelines for this review. Random-effects meta-analysis was undertaken to estimate the pooled point prevalence of ulcers. Reported risk factors in included studies were narratively synthesised. This review is registered in PROSPERO: CRD42022316726.
RESULTS
Overall, 15 studies (8 for prevalence of ulcer and 7 for risk factors) met the inclusion criteria. The pooled point prevalence of ulcer was 34% (95% CIs: 21%, 46%) and 7% (95% CIs: 4%, 11%) among those with foot anaesthesia and among all people affected by leprosy, respectively. Risk factors for developing ulcers included: unable to feel 10 g of monofilament on sensory testing, pronated/hyper-pronated foot, foot with peak plantar pressure, foot with severe deformities, and those with lower education and the unemployed.
CONCLUSIONS
The prevalence of plantar ulceration in leprosy is as high as 34% among those with loss of sensation in the feet. However, the incidence and recurrence rates of ulceration are least reported. The inability to feel 10 g of monofilament appears to be a strong predictor of those at risk of developing ulcers. However, there is a paucity of evidence on identifying those at risk of developing plantar ulcers in leprosy. Prospective studies are needed to estimate the incidence of ulcers. Identifying individuals at risk of ulcers will help design targeted interventions to minimize risk factors, prevent ulcers and promote ulcer healing.
Topics: Humans; Foot Ulcer; Ulcer; Prevalence; Risk Factors; Leprosy
PubMed: 37953361
DOI: 10.1186/s13047-023-00674-4 -
Machine learning-based prediction models for pressure injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis.International Wound Journal Dec 2023Despite the fact that machine learning (ML) algorithms to construct predictive models for pressure injury development are widely reported, the performance of the model... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Despite the fact that machine learning (ML) algorithms to construct predictive models for pressure injury development are widely reported, the performance of the model remains unknown. The goal of the review was to systematically appraise the performance of ML models in predicting pressure injury. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL, Grey literature and other databases were systematically searched. Original journal papers were included which met the inclusion criteria. The methodological quality was assessed independently by two reviewers using the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). Meta-analysis was performed with Metadisc software, with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity and specificity as effect measures. Chi-squared and I tests were used to assess the heterogeneity. A total of 18 studies were included for the narrative review, and 14 of them were eligible for meta-analysis. The models achieved excellent pooled AUC of 0.94, sensitivity of 0.79 (95% CI [0.78-0.80]) and specificity of 0.87 (95% CI [0.88-0.87]). Meta-regressions did not provide evidence that model performance varied by data or model types. The present findings indicate that ML models show an outstanding performance in predicting pressure injury. However, good-quality studies should be conducted to verify our results and confirm the clinical value of ML in pressure injury development.
Topics: Humans; Pressure Ulcer; Sensitivity and Specificity; ROC Curve; Machine Learning; Software
PubMed: 37340520
DOI: 10.1111/iwj.14280 -
Journal of Medical Internet Research Sep 2022Pressure injury is a common complication after a spinal cord injury. Long-term multidisciplinary follow-up is difficult after such patients have been discharged.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pressure injury is a common complication after a spinal cord injury. Long-term multidisciplinary follow-up is difficult after such patients have been discharged. Telemedicine promises to provide convenient and effective support for the prevention and treatment of pressure injury, but previous attempts to demonstrate that have produced inconsistent results.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of telemedicine in preventing and treating pressure injury among community-dwelling patients with spinal cord injury, and determine which telemedicine form is more effective.
METHODS
This systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA-NMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Network Meta-Analysis) standards. Ten databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies related to the effectiveness of telemedicine intervention in patients with spinal cord injury. Two researchers worked independently and blindly selected studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. The results were described as relative risk (RR) and weighted mean difference and 95% CI.
RESULTS
The 35 studies comprised 25 randomized controlled trials and 10 quasi-experimental studies involving 3131 patients. The results showed that telemedicine can significantly (P<.05) reduce the incidence of pressure injury (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.14-0.41; P<.05; I=0%), promote faster healing (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.62-0.85; P<.05; I=0%), and yield lower scores on the pressure ulcer scale of healing (weighted mean difference=-1.98, 95% CI -3.51 to -0.46; P<.05; I=0%). Cumulative ranking estimates showed that combining telemedicine with conventional intervention (93.5%) was the most effective approach.
CONCLUSIONS
Telemedicine is a feasible way to prevent pressure injury among patients with spinal cord injuries. It can decrease the incidence and severity of pressure injury and accelerate patients' healing without imposing economic burden. It is best used in tandem with other, more conventional interventions. Due to the limited quality and quantity of included studies, large-scale and well-designed randomized controlled trials are warranted.
Topics: Humans; Incidence; Independent Living; Pressure Ulcer; Spinal Cord Injuries; Telemedicine
PubMed: 36069842
DOI: 10.2196/37618