-
Journal of Tissue Viability May 2023To determine the influencing factors of medical device related pressure injury (MDRPU) in medical staff by meta-analysis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To determine the influencing factors of medical device related pressure injury (MDRPU) in medical staff by meta-analysis.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was conducted by PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, VIP, CBM, and WanFang Data (from inception to July 27, 2022). Two researchers independently performed literature screening, quality evaluation and data extraction, and meta-analysis was conducted with RevMan 5.4 and Stata12.0 software.
RESULTS
Total of 11215 medical staff were included in 9 articles. Meta analysis showed that gender, occupation, sweating, wearing time, single working time, department of COVID-19, preventive measures, and level 3 PPE were the risk factors for MDRPU in medical staff (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSION
The outbreak of COVID-19 led to the occurrence of MDRPU among medical staff, and the influencing factors should be focused on. The medical administrator can further improve and standardize the preventive measures of MDRPU according to the influencing factors. Medical staff should accurately identify high-risk factors in the clinical work process, implement intervention measures, and reduce the incidence of MDRPU.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Pressure Ulcer; Pandemics; Health Personnel; Risk Factors; Crush Injuries
PubMed: 36803882
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtv.2023.02.006 -
International Wound Journal Sep 2023The aim of this review study is to investigate the nurses' knowledge and related factors towards the prevention of medical device-related pressure ulcers (MDRPUs). An... (Review)
Review
The aim of this review study is to investigate the nurses' knowledge and related factors towards the prevention of medical device-related pressure ulcers (MDRPUs). An extensive search was conducted in international electronic databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus, and Persian databases, such as Iranmedex and the Scientific Information Database from December 1, 2022. During this search, keywords extracted from Medical Subject Headings, such as "Prevention knowledge," "Nurse," "Pressure ulcer," "Equipment and Supplies," and "Intensive Care Units" were used. The quality of the present studies in this review was evaluated based on the appraisal tool for cross-sectional studies (AXIS tool). A total of 1847 nurses participated in this review from five studies, and the majority of them (82.94%) were female. The mean age of the participants was 31.40 (SD = 5.97). The mean score of MDRPUs prevention knowledge in nurses based on PU2014 scale and researcher-made questionnaires were 16.50 (SD = 3.74) out of 31 and 65.49 (SD = 6.33) out of 100, respectively. The knowledge of nurses is influenced by factors such as age, sex, level of education, work experience, technical titles, type of hospital, level of hospital, and type of ward. Various factors had a significant positive relationship with nurses' MDRPUs prevention knowledge, which includes level of education, work experience, previous training on MDRPU, having a wound care certificate, an online search about MDRPU, and attitude and practise towards MDRPU prevention. At the same time, nurses' knowledge about the prevention of MDRPUs had a significant negative relationship with the time interval since last participating in MDRPU training or workshop. Overall, the level of MDRPUs prevention knowledge among nurses was insufficient to moderate. Therefore, it is suggested to provide facilities for nurses to receive the necessary training.
Topics: Humans; Male; Female; Pressure Ulcer; Cross-Sectional Studies; Clinical Competence; Attitude of Health Personnel; Hospitals; Surveys and Questionnaires; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Nurses
PubMed: 36792930
DOI: 10.1111/iwj.14122 -
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 -
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 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 -
International Journal of Nursing... Apr 2023To evaluate the incidence of facial pressure injuries in health-care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic in a meta-analysis. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
AIM
To evaluate the incidence of facial pressure injuries in health-care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic in a meta-analysis.
METHODS
Related studies were obtained through electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) Chinese Scientific Journal (VIP) China Biomedical Literature service systems (CBM) and Wanfang Data (from inception to 27 November 2021). The pooled incidence and the 95% confidence interval of facial pressure injuries were calculated with Review Manager v5.4 software.
RESULTS
Overall, 16 studies with 14 430 health-care professionals were included. Pooled results showed that the pooled incidence of facial pressure injury in health-care professionals was 58.8% (95% CI: 49.0%-68.7%; p < 0.01). The results of the subgroup analysis showed that the incidence of facial pressure injury in these staff was high, and predominantly stage I pressure injury, in the following cases: in health-care professionals who wore personal protective equipment for longer than 4 h, in those without any training experience, and on the nose.
CONCLUSION
Administrators and researchers should pay attention to preventing facial pressure injury related to the wearing of personal protective equipment (PPE) by ensuring all health-care professionals receive training and by limiting prolonged periods of use.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Pressure Ulcer; Pandemics; Incidence; Health Personnel
PubMed: 36535903
DOI: 10.1111/ijn.13125 -
The Spine Journal : Official Journal of... Jun 2023Complications such as pressure sores, pulmonary infection, urinary tract infection (UTI), and venous thromboembolism (VTE) are common after spinal cord injury (SCI).... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND CONTEXT
Complications such as pressure sores, pulmonary infection, urinary tract infection (UTI), and venous thromboembolism (VTE) are common after spinal cord injury (SCI). These have serious consequences for patients' physical, social, and vocational well-being. Several authoritative organizations have developed guidelines for managing these complications after SCI.
PURPOSE
We aim to systematically review and appraise guidelines on the management of four common complications (pressure sores, pulmonary infection, UTI, and VTE) after SCI as well as to summarize relevant recommendations and assess the quality of their supporting evidence.
DESIGN
Systematic review.
METHODS
We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science, as well as guideline-specific databases (eg, National Guideline Clearinghouse) and Google Scholar, from January 2000 to January 2022. We included the most updated guidelines developed by specific authoritative organizations. We evaluated the included guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation 2nd edition instrument, which measures six domains (eg, applicability). Recommendations extracted from guidelines were categorized as for, against, or neither for nor against. An evidence assessment was adopted to classify the quality of supporting evidence as poor, fair, or good.
RESULTS
Eleven guidelines from 2005 to 2020 were included, all of which, among the six domains, scored lowest in the domain of applicability. For pressure sores, guidelines recommended for skin inspection, repositioning, and the use of pressure reduction equipment as preventive measures and dressings, debridement, and surgery as treatment measures. For pulmonary infection, guidelines recommended for physical (eg, the use of an insufflation-exsufflation device) and pharmacological measures (eg, the use of bronchodilators). For UTI, guidelines recommended for antibiotics as a treatment measure but recommended against cranberries, methenamine salts, and acidification or alkalinization agents as preventive measures. For VTE prophylaxis, five guidelines recommended for low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). Three guidelines recommended against unfractionated heparin, whereas one guideline recommended for it. Most of the supporting evidence was of poor quality (130/139), and the rest was of fair quality (9/139).
CONCLUSIONS
For pressure sores, pulmonary infection, and UTI, evidence of poor to fair quality indicated consistent recommendations for prevention and treatment measures. For VTE, LMWH was consistently recommended, whereas recommendations on the use of unfractionated heparin were controversial.
Topics: Humans; Heparin; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Venous Thromboembolism; Pressure Ulcer; Spinal Cord Injuries; Anticoagulants
PubMed: 36521679
DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2022.12.001 -
Nursing Open May 2023This systematic review evaluated the quality of evidence for the prevention and management of facial pressure injuries in medical staff. (Review)
Review
AIM
This systematic review evaluated the quality of evidence for the prevention and management of facial pressure injuries in medical staff.
DESIGN
This review was presented in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.
METHODS
We retrieved the relevant studies from 19 databases. Using the literature evaluation standards and evidence grading system of the Australian Joanna Briggs Institute Evidence-Based Health Care Center, we evaluated the quality of the literature encompassing different types of research and assessed their levels of evidence.
RESULTS
A total of 13 studies were included, including seven expert consensuses, two recommended practices, one clinical decision, one best practice information booklet, one systematic review and one randomized controlled trial. In the end, 31 best evidence were summarized, including skin cleaning and care, PPE placement and movement, reasonable use of dressings, treatment measures and education and training.
Topics: Humans; Pressure Ulcer; Australia; Medical Staff; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36502522
DOI: 10.1002/nop2.1543 -
International Wound Journal Aug 2023Pressure injuries (PIs) are one of the major and costliest medical problems with severe implications for patients. Cardiovascular surgery patients are at the higher risk... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Pressure injuries (PIs) are one of the major and costliest medical problems with severe implications for patients. Cardiovascular surgery patients are at the higher risk of developing surgery-related PIs. So this study was conducted with the aim of investigating the prevalence and factors associated with PIs in patients undergoing open heart surgery. We identified articles through electronic databases such as Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, ProQuest; and Persian Databases: SID, Magiran and Irandoc without restriction on language or publication period (from inception through June 2022). Finally, 17 studies that fulfilled eligibility criteria were included in final systematic review and meta-analysis. Data analyses were conducted using STATA version 14. The pooled prevalence of PI in patients undergoing open heart surgery was 24.06% (95% CI: 17.85-30.27). High heterogeneity was observed across the included studies (I = 96.0, P < 0.000). The prevalence by gender was reported as 25.19% (95% CI: 13.45-36.93) in men and 33.36% (95 CI%: 19.99-46.74) in women. The result showed there was statistically significant association between PI and Female sex (Pooled Est: 1.551, 95% CI: 1.199-2.006, z = 3.345, P = 0.001), diabetes (Pooled Est: 1.985, 95% CI: 1.383-2.849, z = 3.719, P = 0.000), advanced age (SMD: 0.33 years; 95% CI: 0.09-0.57), Duration of surgery (SMD: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.19-0.75) and preoperative serum albumin level (SMD: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.14-0.98). The relatively high PIs incidence among patients undergoing open heart surgery suggests that typical PI prevention methods are insufficient for this population. Targeted prevention measures must be developed and implemented.
Topics: Male; Humans; Female; Infant; Pressure Ulcer; Prevalence; Cardiac Surgical Procedures; Incidence
PubMed: 36447333
DOI: 10.1111/iwj.14040 -
International Journal of Environmental... Nov 2022The purpose was to identify and summarize the existing evidence on the efficacy and safety of the topical application of olive oil for preventing pressure ulcers (PUs).... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The purpose was to identify and summarize the existing evidence on the efficacy and safety of the topical application of olive oil for preventing pressure ulcers (PUs). We included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients at risk of developing PUs, testing the topical application of olive oil versus other products for PU prevention. We assessed the risk of bias using the RoB 2 tool, and the certainty of the evidence with GRADE. Four RCTs met the eligibility criteria. All studies were judged at a low risk of bias overall. The meta-analysis showed that the clinical efficacy of olive oil for prevention occurs by reducing the incidence of PUs (RR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.30 to 0.79, = 0%); with no differences in adverse effects, it may be associated with a shorter development time of PUs and shorter hospital stays. The certainty of the evidence assessed by the GRADE approach was moderate and low. The topical application of olive oil is effective and safe in reducing the incidence of PUs compared to other treatments. These findings could provide new insights into olive oil as a preventive and alternative treatment for PUs as it is accessible and inexpensive compared to other products.
Topics: Humans; Pressure Ulcer; Olive Oil; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Incidence; Suppuration
PubMed: 36429639
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192214921