-
International Journal of Nursing Studies Jul 2024Numerous interventions for pressure injury prevention have been developed, including care bundles. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Numerous interventions for pressure injury prevention have been developed, including care bundles.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review the effectiveness of pressure injury prevention care bundles on pressure injury prevalence, incidence, and hospital-acquired pressure injury rate in hospitalised patients.
DATA SOURCES
The Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (via PubMed), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EMBASE, Scopus, the Cochrane Library and two registries were searched (from 2009 to September 2023).
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies with a comparison group published in English after 2008 were included. Studies reporting on the frequency of pressure injuries where the number of patients was not the numerator or denominator, or where the denominator was not reported, and single subgroups of hospitalised patients were excluded. Educational programmes targeting healthcare professionals and bundles targeting specific types of pressure injuries were excluded.
PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS
Bundles with ≥3 components directed towards patients and implemented in ≥2 hospital services were included.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessments were undertaken independently by two researchers. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted. The certainty of the body of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation.
RESULTS
Nine studies (seven non-randomised with historical controls; two randomised) conducted in eight countries were included. There were four to eight bundle components; most were core, and only a few were discretionary. Various strategies were used prior to (six studies), during (five studies) and after (two studies) implementation to embed the bundles. The pooled risk ratio for pressure injury prevalence (five non-randomised studies) was 0.55 (95 % confidence intervals 0.29-1.03), and for hospital-acquired pressure injury rate (five non-randomised studies) it was 0.31 (95 % confidence intervals 0.12-0.83). All non-randomised studies were at high risk of bias, with very low certainty of evidence. In the two randomised studies, the care bundles had non-significant effects on hospital-acquired pressure injury incidence density, but data could not be pooled.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS
Whilst some studies showed decreases in pressure injuries, this evidence was very low certainty. The potential benefits of adding emerging evidence-based components to bundles should be considered. Future effectiveness studies should include contemporaneous controls and the development of a comprehensive, theory and evidence-informed implementation plan.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER
PROSPERO CRD42023423058.
TWEETABLE ABSTRACT
Pressure injury prevention care bundles decrease hospital-acquired pressure injuries, but the certainty of this evidence is very low.
Topics: Pressure Ulcer; Humans; Patient Care Bundles; Hospitalization
PubMed: 38642429
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2024.104768 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2020Pressure ulcers (also known as pressure sores, decubitus ulcers or bedsores) are localised injuries to the skin or underlying tissue, or both. Pressure ulcers are a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Pressure ulcers (also known as pressure sores, decubitus ulcers or bedsores) are localised injuries to the skin or underlying tissue, or both. Pressure ulcers are a disabling consequence of immobility. Electrical stimulation (ES) is widely used for the treatment of pressure ulcers. However, it is not clear whether ES is effective.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effects (benefits and harms) of electrical stimulation (ES) for treating pressure ulcers.
SEARCH METHODS
In July 2019 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. We did not impose any restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ES (plus standard care) with sham/no ES (plus standard care) for treating pressure ulcers.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 20 studies with 913 participants. The mean age of participants ranged from 26 to 83 years; 50% were male. ES was administered for a median (interquartile range (IQR)) duration of five (4 to 8) hours per week. The chronicity of the pressure ulcers was variable, ranging from a mean of four days to more than 12 months. Most of the pressure ulcers were on the sacral and coccygeal region (30%), and most were stage III (45%). Half the studies were at risk of performance and detection bias, and 25% were at risk of attrition and selective reporting bias. Overall, the GRADE assessment of the certainty of evidence for outcomes was moderate to very low. Nineteen studies were conducted in four different settings, including rehabilitation and geriatric hospitals, medical centres, a residential care centre, and a community-based centre. ES probably increases the proportion of pressure ulcers healed compared with no ES (risk ratio (RR) 1.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.39 to 2.85; I = 0%; 11 studies, 501 participants (512 pressure ulcers)). We downgraded the evidence to moderate certainty due to risk of bias. It is uncertain whether ES decreases pressure ulcer severity on a composite measure compared with no ES (mean difference (MD) -2.43, 95% CI -6.14 to 1.28; 1 study, 15 participants (15 pressure ulcers) and whether ES decreases the surface area of pressure ulcers when compared with no ES (12 studies; 494 participants (505 pressure ulcers)). Data for the surface area of pressure ulcers were not pooled because there was considerable statistical heterogeneity between studies (I = 96%) but the point estimates for the MD of each study ranged from -0.90 cm to 10.37 cm. We downgraded the evidence to very low certainty due to risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision. It is uncertain whether ES decreases the time to complete healing of pressure ulcers compared with no ES (hazard ratio (HR) 1.06, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.41; I = 0%; 2 studies, 55 participants (55 pressure ulcers)). We downgraded the evidence to very low certainty due to risk of bias, indirectness and imprecision. ES may be associated with an excess of, or difference in, adverse events (13 studies; 586 participants (602 pressure ulcers)). Data for adverse events were not pooled but the types of reported adverse events included skin redness, itchy skin, dizziness and delusions, deterioration of the pressure ulcer, limb amputation, and occasionally death. We downgraded the evidence to low certainty due to risk of selection and attrition bias and imprecision. ES probably increases the rate of pressure ulcer healing compared with no ES (MD 4.59% per week, 95% CI 3.49 to 5.69; I = 25%; 12 studies, 561 participants (613 pressure ulcers)). We downgraded the evidence to moderate certainty due to risk of bias. We did not find any studies that looked at quality of life, depression, or consumers' perception of treatment effectiveness.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
ES probably increases the proportion of pressure ulcers healed and the rate of pressure ulcer healing (moderate certainty evidence), but its effect on time to complete healing is uncertain compared with no ES (very low certainty evidence). It is also uncertain whether ES decreases the surface area of pressure ulcers. The evidence to date is insufficient to support the widespread use of ES for pressure ulcers outside of research. Future research needs to focus on large-scale trials to determine the effect of ES on all key outcomes.
Topics: Electric Stimulation; Humans; Pressure Ulcer; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; Wound Healing
PubMed: 31962369
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012196.pub2 -
JMIR MHealth and UHealth Jun 2020The increasing global use of smartphones has contributed to the growing use of apps for various health conditions, showing promising results. Through mobile apps, it is... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The increasing global use of smartphones has contributed to the growing use of apps for various health conditions, showing promising results. Through mobile apps, it is possible to perform chronological and iconographic follow-up of wounds, such as pressure ulcers, using a simple and practical tool. However, numerous surveys have pointed out issues related to the functionality, design, safety, and veracity of app information.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review of published studies regarding mobile apps and a systematic survey in app stores looking for apps developed to identify, evaluate, treat, and/or prevent pressure ulcers in adults, and to evaluate those apps based on software quality characteristics.
METHODS
This review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The main bibliographic databases were searched between January 1, 2007 and October 15, 2018, and an app survey was performed in app stores. The selected studies were evaluated according to software quality characteristics by the International Organization for Standardization/International Electrotechnical Commission (ie, ISO/IEC 25010:2011) that involve functionality, efficiency, compatibility, usability, reliability, safety, maintenance, and portability.
RESULTS
The search in databases and web-based app stores returned a total of 2075 studies. After removal of duplicates and screening of titles and abstracts, 48 complete articles were evaluated for eligibility, and among these, six were included for qualitative synthesis.
CONCLUSIONS
In this review, it was observed that all studies involved the initial phase of app development or improvement, and therefore, the apps still need to be evaluated using different software quality characteristics, so that in the future, a gold standard can be approached. Therefore, the prescription of an app for the identification, evaluation, treatment, and/or prevention of pressure ulcers in adults is currently limited. However, the evaluated studies provided important insights for future research. It is of utmost importance that future surveys develop apps jointly with users, using collaborative and cocreative processes and assess patients in real-world situations across different service settings, and they should consider different ethnicities, so that apps are useful to end users, such as patients, family members, health professionals, and students, in the health area. In addition, it is necessary for studies to describe the methodological course of app development in a clear and objective way in order to ensure reproducibility of the study and to offer inputs to allow future research to approach the development of ideal apps that are geared to positively impact the health of end users.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42018114137; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=114137.
Topics: Adult; Delivery of Health Care; Humans; Mobile Applications; Pressure Ulcer; Reproducibility of Results; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 32470916
DOI: 10.2196/14266 -
International Journal of Environmental... Jan 2023Pressure Injuries (PI) are one of the most common health conditions in the United States. Most acute or long-term care patients are at risk of developing PI. Machine... (Review)
Review
Pressure Injuries (PI) are one of the most common health conditions in the United States. Most acute or long-term care patients are at risk of developing PI. Machine Learning (ML) has been utilized to manage patients with PI, in which one systematic review describes how ML is used in PI management in 32 studies. This research, different from the previous systematic review, summarizes the previous contributions of ML in PI from January 2007 to July 2022, categorizes the studies according to medical specialties, analyzes gaps, and identifies opportunities for future research directions. PRISMA guidelines were adopted using the four most common databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Science Direct) and other resources, which result in 90 eligible studies. The reviewed articles are divided into three categories based on PI time of occurrence: before occurrence (48%); at time of occurrence (16%); and after occurrence (36%). Each category is further broken down into sub-fields based on medical specialties, which result in sixteen specialties. Each specialty is analyzed in terms of methods, inputs, and outputs. The most relevant and potentially useful applications and methods in PI management are outlined and discussed. This includes deep learning techniques and hybrid models, integration of existing risk assessment tools with ML that leads to a partnership between provider assessment and patients' Electronic Health Records (EHR).
Topics: Humans; Pressure Ulcer; Machine Learning; Electronic Health Records
PubMed: 36613118
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20010796 -
International Wound Journal Oct 2020Wound care is an important realm of nurses' clinical responsibilities, and a broad knowledge and range of skills are needed to perform efficient and safe patient care....
Wound care is an important realm of nurses' clinical responsibilities, and a broad knowledge and range of skills are needed to perform efficient and safe patient care. Nurses' knowledge on this matter can be measured using knowledge tests. This study aims to identify, define, and analyse the knowledge tests developed for the measurement of nurses' wound care knowledge, and to evaluate the psychometric properties of the tests. This study was a systematic literature review. A total of 52 studies and 18 instruments were found. Of the 18 instruments, only 5 had been used more than once and were successful in a psychometric evaluation. These five instruments were analysed on the basis of their psychometric properties by using Zwakhalen et al.'s (2006) psychometric testing framework. According to the analysis, the Pressure Ulcer Knowledge Test (PUKT) and the Pressure Ulcer Knowledge Assessment Tool (PUKAT) were the most valid and reliable instruments for measuring nurses' wound care knowledge. Most of the instruments identified and analysed focused on pressure ulcers, indicating that future instruments could focus more on other types of wounds or on wound care in general in order to receive a broader understanding of nurses' wound care knowledge.
Topics: Clinical Competence; Humans; Pressure Ulcer; Psychometrics; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 32496632
DOI: 10.1111/iwj.13417 -
International Journal of Nursing Studies Oct 2021Pressure ulcers are a common complication with a high impact on well-being and quality of life in people with impaired mobility and/or dysfunctional pain sensations.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pressure ulcers are a common complication with a high impact on well-being and quality of life in people with impaired mobility and/or dysfunctional pain sensations. Prevention is therefore crucial. However, persons at risk seem to experience difficulties in adhering to self-management regimens that can help to prevent or diminish the development of pressure ulcers. Self-management support interventions might help to improve their self-management skills.
OBJECTIVES
To review the content, components and effectiveness of self-management support interventions on clinical and behavioral outcomes for people at risk of pressure ulcers.
METHODS
A systematic literature search for the period of January 2000 to February 2020 was conducted in five databases (CINAHL, Cochrane, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science). Inclusion criteria were: (1) studies including persons at a high risk of pressure ulcers; (2) studies investigating interventions focused on self-management support; (3) studies describing clinical and behavioral outcomes related to prevention and care of pressure ulcers. All studies were independently screened on title, abstracts and full text by two researchers. The PRISMS taxonomy of 14 components was used to code intervention content.
RESULTS
The search yielded 5297 papers, which resulted in the inclusion of 16 papers on self-management support interventions for persons at risk of pressure ulcers. Interventions focused mostly on 'Information about condition and/or management' (13 interventions), 'Training in practical self-management activities' (7 interventions), and 'Training in psychological strategies' (6 interventions). 'Provision of equipment' was not investigated. The intensity of the interventions varied in delivery mode, frequency and duration. Improvements were found in clinical outcomes in four studies and in behavioral outcomes in ten studies. Four studies showed improvements in clinical outcomes and ten studies in behavioral outcomes. Knowledge was positively influenced in eight studies.
CONCLUSION
Self-management support interventions show potential. The extensiveness and intensity of the interventions seem to be predictive for the effectiveness, but specific content components cannot be recommended. This review revealed recommendations for future research and international consensus should be reached about patient-relevant outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Pressure Ulcer; Quality of Life; Self-Management
PubMed: 34274772
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2021.104014 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Dec 2023Despite numerous measures used to prevent pressure ulcers, their growing prevalence in recent years is expected to continue as the population ages. This review aims to... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Despite numerous measures used to prevent pressure ulcers, their growing prevalence in recent years is expected to continue as the population ages. This review aims to report the outcomes of the regenerative potential of MSCs in treating pressure ulcers, assessing the effectiveness of MSCs in treating pressure ulcers.
METHODS
A computerized search for articles on animal models that use MSCs as primary therapy to treat pressure ulcers, published from conception to present, was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL. Our search yielded 52 articles, narrowed to 44 after excluding duplicates.
RESULTS
Out of 52 articles collected from four databases, 11 met the inclusion criteria. A total of 11 articles published between 2008 and 2020 met the inclusion criteria. Eight studies were observational descriptive papers in animal models, and three were prospective. Six studies used autologous MSCs, while five used allogenic MSCs. Three studies were conducted in humans, and the remaining eight were conducted in animals. The most common method of cell delivery was an intradermal injection in the margins of the ulcer. All studies reported positive results, including improved wound healing, reduced inflammation, and improved tissue regeneration.
CONCLUSIONS
MSCs have shown promising results in treating pressure ulcers in animal and clinical trials. The combination of MSCs and scaffold materials has also been studied and found to be effective in wound healing. A standardized human wound model has been proposed further to investigate the efficacy of cell-based therapies for chronic wounds. However, more research is needed to determine the best quantity of cells to apply for pressure ulcers and to ensure the safety and efficacy of these treatments in clinical settings.
PubMed: 38137625
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12247545 -
Journal of Diabetes Science and... Jan 2023Areas of the foot with diabetic ulcers have been observed to have greater plantar pressures compared to non-ulcerated. Pressures play an essential role in the mechanism... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
Areas of the foot with diabetic ulcers have been observed to have greater plantar pressures compared to non-ulcerated. Pressures play an essential role in the mechanism of lesion, and their reduction is effective in prevention. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate pedobarography as a predictive tool for ulcer development, since there is still no consensus on this aspect.
METHODS
We searched PUBMED (MedLine), EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL and Scielo for cohort studies that measured plantar pressure at baseline and verified ulcer development on follow-up. Pooled effects of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and relative risk were calculated using the inverse variance method. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool.
RESULTS
Three studies ( = 2000) had enough information on accuracy to be included into a meta-analysis, and 4 ( = 2651) were analyzed using qualitative methods. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were found to be 0.63 (Confidence Interval (CI) 0.58-0.68) and 0.42 (CI 0.27-0.58), respectively. Pooled relative risk was 1.95 (CI 1.09-3.51). Risk of bias was low to uncertain.
CONCLUSIONS
Pedobarography in itself appears to have low accuracy in evaluating risk of ulceration. Several methodological heterogeneities were found, and the most optimal cut-off value is yet to be determined.
Topics: Humans; Diabetic Foot; Foot; Foot Ulcer; Sensitivity and Specificity; Pressure; Diabetes Mellitus
PubMed: 34590893
DOI: 10.1177/19322968211043550 -
Cureus Apr 2024Venous ulcers are open wounds commonly associated with chronic venous insufficiency. Each patient's healing process is unique, and factors like nutrition and compression... (Review)
Review
Venous ulcers are open wounds commonly associated with chronic venous insufficiency. Each patient's healing process is unique, and factors like nutrition and compression therapy can affect it. Compression therapy and optimal nutritional status can assist in improving venous blood circulation, decreasing swelling, and promoting wound healing. This in-depth review looks at all the recent research on how nutrition and compression therapy can help heal venous ulcers, aiming to develop evidence-based guidelines for improving treatment outcomes. The systematic review, registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) and following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) principles, conducted an extensive electronic search in databases such as PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Scopus. Using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and different types of studies, the search method focused on studies that directly looked at how nutrition and compression therapy affected the healing of venous ulcers. After deduplicating and screening publications, a collaborative full-text review was conducted to determine their inclusion. As a result, several research studies were chosen for the qualitative synthesis. The authors created a data extraction form to document important variables such as demographics, therapy specifics, and wound features. Several studies on patients with venous ulcers have shown that consuming basic nutrients can improve wound healing. Treatment results differed depending on the types of compression and pressure intensity. Although minimal data indicates the possible benefits of two-layer therapy, a definitive comparison is still uncertain. Further clinical studies are necessary to investigate a wider range of dietary factors and to evaluate different treatments in similar situations.
PubMed: 38694674
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.57407 -
Journal of Pharmacy Practice Apr 2023As people age, they become increasingly vulnerable to the untoward effects of medicines due to changes in body systems. These may result in medicines related problems... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
As people age, they become increasingly vulnerable to the untoward effects of medicines due to changes in body systems. These may result in medicines related problems (MRPs) and consequent decline or deterioration in health.
AIM
To identify MRPs, indicators of deterioration associated with these MRPs, and preventative interventions from the literature.
DESIGN AND SETTING
Systematic review of primary studies on MRPs originating in Primary Care in older people.
METHODS
Relevant studies published between 2001 and April 2018 were obtained from Medline (via PubMed), CINAHL, Embase, Psych Info, PASCAL, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Science Direct, and Zetoc. Falls, delirium, pressure ulcer, hospitalization, use of health services and death were agreed indicators of deterioration. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Down and Black tool.
RESULTS
There were 1858 articles retrieved from the data bases. Out of these, 21 full text articles met inclusion criteria for the review. MRPs identified were medication error, potentially inappropriate medicines, adverse drug reaction and non-adherence. These were associated with indicators of deterioration. Interventions that involved doctors, pharmacists and patients in planning and implementation yielded benefits in halting MRPs.
CONCLUSION
This Systematic review summarizes MRPs and associated indicators of deterioration. Appropriate interventions appeared to be effective against certain MRPs and their consequences. Further studies to explore deterioration presented in this systematic review is imperative.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Medication Errors; Pharmacists; Physicians; Primary Health Care
PubMed: 34159813
DOI: 10.1177/08971900211023638