-
International Journal of Nursing Studies Dec 2023Pressure injuries are a fundamental safety concern in older people living in nursing homes. Recent studies report a disparate body of evidence on pressure injury... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Pressure injuries are a fundamental safety concern in older people living in nursing homes. Recent studies report a disparate body of evidence on pressure injury prevalence and incidence in this population.
OBJECTIVES
To systematically quantify the prevalence and incidence of pressure injuries among older people living in nursing homes, and to identify the most frequently occurring PI stage(s) and anatomical location(s).
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
SETTING(S)
Nursing homes, aged care, or long-term care facilities.
PARTICIPANTS
Older people, 60 years and older.
METHODS
Cross-sectional and cohort studies reporting on either prevalence or incidence of pressure injuries were included. Studies published in English from 2000 onwards were systematically searched in Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and ProQuest. Screening, data extraction and quality appraisal were undertaken independently by two or more authors and adjudicated by another. Outcomes included pressure injury point prevalence, cumulative incidence, and nursing home acquired pressure injury rate. In meta-analyses, Cochrane's Q test and the I statistic were used to explore heterogeneity. Random effects models were used in the presence of substantial heterogeneity. Sources of heterogeneity were investigated by subgroup analyses and meta-regression.
RESULTS
3384 abstracts were screened, and 47 full-text studies included. In 30 studies with 355,784 older people, the pooled pressure injury prevalence for any stage was 11.6 % (95 % CI 9.6-13.7 %). Fifteen studies with 5,421,798 older people reported the prevalence of pressure injury excluding stage I and the pooled estimate was 7.2 % (95 % CI 6.2-8.3 %). The pooled incidence for pressure injury of any stage in four studies with 10,645 older people was 14.3 % (95 % CI 5.5-26.2 %). Nursing home acquired pressure injury rate was reported in six studies with 79,998 older people and the pooled estimate was 8.5 % (95 % CI 4.4-13.5 %). Stage I and stage II pressure injuries were the most common stages reported. The heel (34.1 %), sacrum (27.2 %) and foot (18.4 %) were the three most reported locations of pressure injuries. Meta-regression results indicated a reduction in pressure injury prevalence over the years of data collection.
CONCLUSION
The burden of pressure injuries among older people in nursing homes is similar to hospitalised patients and requires a targeted approach to prevention as is undertaken in hospitals. Future studies using robust methodologies focusing on epidemiology of pressure injury development in older people are needed to conduct as the first step of preventing pressure injuries.
REGISTRATION NUMBER
PROSPERO CRD42022328367.
TWEETABLE ABSTRACT
Pressure injury rates in nursing homes are comparable to hospital rates indicating the need for targeted programmes similar to those in hospitals.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Pressure Ulcer; Incidence; Prevalence; Cross-Sectional Studies; Nursing Homes
PubMed: 37801939
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2023.104605 -
International Journal of Nursing Studies Oct 2023Pressure ulcers are a major health concern. They have a significant impact on the healthcare system and individuals, reducing quality of life across several domains. In... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pressure ulcers are a major health concern. They have a significant impact on the healthcare system and individuals, reducing quality of life across several domains. In community settings, self-management behaviours are central to their prevention. However, adherence with pressure ulcer prevention guidelines remains low, with little evidence guiding the relationship between patients and healthcare professionals to establish a concordant partnership.
OBJECTIVE
To synthesise evidence on factors contributing to community-based pressure ulcer prevention using the Theoretical Domains Framework and the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behaviour (COM-B) model of behaviour.
DESIGN
Mixed methods systematic review and narrative synthesis.
METHOD
Systematic searches were conducted in the CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases on 14th December 2022. Studies were eligible if they contained data on the factors associated with adherence and concordance with pressure ulcer prevention guidelines in the community for patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals. Methodological quality was assessed using the Hawker tool. Findings were synthesised using the Theoretical Domains Framework. The resulting themes were mapped onto the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behaviour (COM-B) model.
RESULTS
Thirty studies were included in the review, including quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research. The synthesis identified 12 of the 14 Theoretical Domains Framework domains, with knowledge, social influences, beliefs about consequences, and beliefs about capabilities the most prevalent. Although knowledge appears to be an important contributor to adherence with prevention guidelines, knowledge alone does not appear sufficient to achieve concordance. A concordant relationship was facilitated by healthcare professionals' knowledge, motivation to work alongside patients and their priorities, and interpersonal skills to build rapport and trust, whilst barriers included lack of healthcare professional skills to navigate sensitive issues, paternalistic views of patient compliance and organisational processes that impact building rapport.
CONCLUSIONS
Several psychosocial factors may affect the ability to achieve concordance between individuals, caregivers and healthcare professionals with pressure ulcer prevention guidelines in the community. However, data regarding the efficacy of behaviour change interventions targeting these constructs is limited, with further research required to guide intervention development in this area.
Topics: Humans; Pressure Ulcer; Quality of Life; Motivation; Health Personnel; Patient Compliance; Qualitative Research
PubMed: 37542960
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2023.104561 -
Efficacy of acupuncture therapies on pressure injury: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.Asian Journal of Surgery Nov 2023
Meta-Analysis
Topics: Humans; Acupuncture Therapy; Network Meta-Analysis; Pressure Ulcer
PubMed: 37537068
DOI: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2023.07.009 -
Diabetes/metabolism Research and Reviews Mar 2024The presence of peripheral artery disease (PAD) confers a significantly increased risk of failure to heal and major lower limb amputation for people with...
INTRODUCTION
The presence of peripheral artery disease (PAD) confers a significantly increased risk of failure to heal and major lower limb amputation for people with diabetes-related foot ulcer (DFU). Determining performance of non-invasive bedside tests for predicting likely DFU outcomes is therefore key to effective risk stratification of patients with DFU and PAD to guide management decisions. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the performance of non-invasive bedside tests for PAD to predict DFU healing, healing post-minor amputation, or need for minor or major amputation in people with diabetes and DFU or gangrene.
METHODS
A database search of Medline and Embase was conducted from 1980 to 30 November 2022. Prospective studies that evaluated non-invasive bedside tests in patients with diabetes, with and without PAD and foot ulceration or gangrene to predict the outcomes of DFU healing, minor amputation, and major amputation with or without revascularisation, were eligible. Included studies were required to have a minimum 6-month follow-up period and report adequate data to calculate the positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio for the outcomes of DFU healing, and minor and major amputation. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool.
RESULTS
From 14,820 abstracts screened 28 prognostic studies met the inclusion criteria. The prognostic tests evaluated by the studies included: ankle-brachial index (ABI) in 9 studies; ankle pressures in 10 studies, toe-brachial index in 4 studies, toe pressure in 9 studies, transcutaneous oxygen pressure (TcPO ) in 7 studies, skin perfusion pressure in 5 studies, continuous wave Doppler (pedal waveforms) in 2 studies, pedal pulses in 3 studies, and ankle peak systolic velocity in 1 study. Study quality was variable. Common reasons for studies having a moderate or high risk of bias were poorly described study participation, attrition rates, and inadequate adjustment for confounders. In people with DFU, toe pressure ≥30 mmHg, TcPO ≥25 mmHg, and skin perfusion pressure of ≥40 mmHg were associated with a moderate to large increase in pretest probability of healing in people with DFU. Toe pressure ≥30 mmHg was associated with a moderate increase in healing post-minor amputation. An ABI using a threshold of ≥0.9 did not increase the pretest probability of DFU healing, whereas an ABI <0.5 was associated with a moderate increase in pretest probability of non-healing. Few studies investigated amputation outcomes. An ABI <0.4 demonstrated the largest increase in pretest probability of a major amputation (PLR ≥10).
CONCLUSIONS
Prognostic capacity of bedside testing for DFU healing and amputation is variable. A toe pressure ≥30 mmHg, TcPO ≥25 mmHg, and skin perfusion pressure of ≥40 mmHg are associated with a moderate to large increase in pretest probability of healing in people with DFU. There are little data available evaluating the prognostic capacity of bedside testing for healing after minor amputation or for major amputation in people with DFU. Current evidence suggests that an ABI <0.4 may be associated with a large increase in risk of major amputation. The findings of this systematic review need to be interpreted in the context of limitations of available evidence, including varying rates of revascularisation, lack of post-revascularisation bedside testing, and heterogenous subpopulations.
Topics: Humans; Diabetic Foot; Gangrene; Prospective Studies; Foot Ulcer; Wound Healing; Amputation, Surgical; Peripheral Arterial Disease; Point-of-Care Testing; Diabetes Mellitus
PubMed: 37493206
DOI: 10.1002/dmrr.3701 -
Diabetes/metabolism Research and Reviews Mar 2024As a progressive disease process, early diagnosis and ongoing monitoring and treatment of lower limb peripheral artery disease (PAD) is critical to reduce the risk of... (Review)
Review
As a progressive disease process, early diagnosis and ongoing monitoring and treatment of lower limb peripheral artery disease (PAD) is critical to reduce the risk of diabetes-related foot ulcer (DFU) development, non-healing of wounds, infection and amputation, in addition to cardiovascular complications. There are a variety of non-invasive tests available to diagnose PAD at the bedside, but there is no consensus as to the most diagnostically accurate of these bedside investigations or their reliability for use as a method of ongoing monitoring. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to first determine the diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive bedside tests for identifying PAD compared to an imaging reference test and second to determine the intra- and inter-rater reliability of non-invasive bedside tests in adults with diabetes. A database search of Medline and Embase was conducted from 1980 to 30 November 2022. Prospective and retrospective investigations of the diagnostic accuracy of bedside testing in people with diabetes using an imaging reference standard and reliability studies of bedside testing techniques conducted in people with diabetes were eligible. Included studies of diagnostic accuracy were required to report adequate data to calculate the positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) which were the primary endpoints. The quality appraisal was conducted using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies and Quality Appraisal of Reliability quality appraisal tools. From a total of 8517 abstracts retrieved, 40 studies met the inclusion criteria for the diagnostic accuracy component of the review and seven studies met the inclusion criteria for the reliability component of the review. Most studies investigated the diagnostic accuracy of ankle -brachial index (ABI) (N = 38). In people with and without DFU, PLRs ranged from 1.69 to 19.9 and NLRs from 0.29 to 0.84 indicating an ABI <0.9 increases the likelihood of disease (but the extent of the increase ranges from a small to large amount) and an ABI within the normal range (≥0.90 and <1.3) does not exclude PAD. For toe-brachial index (TBI), a threshold of <0.70 has a moderate ability to rule PAD in and out; however, this is based on limited evidence. Similarly, a small number of studies indicate that one or more monophasic Doppler waveforms in the pedal arteries is associated with the presence of PAD, whereas tri- or biphasic waveform suggests that PAD is less likely. Several forms of bedside testing may also be useful as adjunct tests and 7 studies were identified that investigated the reliability of bedside tests including ABI, toe pressure, TBI, transcutaneous oxygen pressure (TcPO ) and pulse palpation. Inter-rater reliability was poor for pulse palpation and moderate for TcPO The ABI, toe pressure and TBI may have good inter- and intra-rater reliability, but margins of error are wide, requiring a large change in the measurement for it to be considered a true change rather than error. There is currently no single bedside test or a combination of bedside tests that has been shown to have superior diagnostic accuracy for PAD in people with diabetes with or without DFU. However, an ABI <0.9 or >1.3, TBI of <0.70, and absent or monophasic pedal Doppler waveforms are useful to identify the presence of disease. The ability of the tests to exclude disease is variable and although reliability may be acceptable, evidence of error in the measurements means test results that are within normal limits should be considered with caution and in the context of other vascular assessment findings (e.g., pedal pulse palpation and clinical signs) and progress of DFU healing.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Reproducibility of Results; Peripheral Arterial Disease; Diabetic Foot; Ankle Brachial Index; Diabetes Mellitus
PubMed: 37477087
DOI: 10.1002/dmrr.3683 -
International Journal of Nursing Studies Sep 2023Evidence-based pressure injury prevention and management is a global health service priority. Low uptake of pressure injury guidelines leads to compromised patient... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Evidence-based pressure injury prevention and management is a global health service priority. Low uptake of pressure injury guidelines leads to compromised patient outcomes. Understanding clinicians' and patients' views on the barriers and facilitators to implementing guidelines and mapping the identified barriers and facilitators to the Theoretical Domains Framework and behaviour change techniques will inform an end-user and theoretically informed intervention to improve guideline uptake in the acute care setting.
OBJECTIVES
To synthesise quantitative and qualitative evidence on i) hospital clinicians' and inpatients' perceptions and experiences of evidence-based pressure injury practices and ii) barriers and facilitators to implementing guidelines.
DESIGN
A convergent integrated mixed-methods systematic review was conducted using the JBI approach.
DATA SOURCE
English language peer-reviewed studies published from 2009 to August 2022 were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Cochrane Central Library.
REVIEW METHODS
Included studies reported: i) acute care hospital clinicians' and patients' perceptions and experiences of evidence-based pressure injury practices and ii) barriers and facilitators to implementing guidelines. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used for critical appraisal. Quantitative data was transformed into qualitised data, then thematically synthesised with qualitative data, comparing clinicians' and patients' views. Barriers and facilitators associated with each main theme were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework and allocated to relevant behaviour change techniques.
RESULTS
Fifty-five out of 14,488 studies of variable quality (29 quantitative, 22 qualitative, 4 mixed-methods) met the inclusion criteria. Four main themes represent factors thought to influence the implementation of evidence-based guidelines: 1) nurse-led multidisciplinary care, 2) patient participation in care, 3) practicability of implementation and 4) attitudes towards pressure injury prevention and management. Most barriers identified by clinicians were related to the third theme, whilst for patients, there were multiple barriers under theme 2. Barriers were mainly mapped to the Knowledge domain and Environmental Context and Resources domain and were matched to the behaviour change techniques of "instruction on how to perform a behaviour" and "restructuring the physical environment". Most facilitators mentioned by clinicians and patients were related to themes 1 and 2, respectively, and mapped to the Environmental Context and Resources domain. All patient-related attitudes in theme 4 were facilitators.
CONCLUSIONS
These review findings highlight the most influential factors related to implementing evidence-based pressure injury care from clinicians' and patients' views and mapping these factors to the Theoretical Domains Framework and behaviour change techniques has contributed to developing a stakeholder-tailored implementation intervention in acute care settings.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION
CRD42021250885.
Topics: Humans; Pressure Ulcer; Inpatients
PubMed: 37453248
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2023.104557 -
International Wound Journal Oct 2023The purpose of this review study is to investigate the attitude of nursing students toward the prevention of pressure ulcers (PUs) and related factors. From February 1,... (Review)
Review
The purpose of this review study is to investigate the attitude of nursing students toward the prevention of pressure ulcers (PUs) and related factors. From February 1, 2023, a comprehensive search was conducted in international and Persian electronic databases such as Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, Iranmedex, and Scientific information database (SID). The keywords obtained from Medical Subject Headings, including "Attitude", "Nursing students", and "Pressure ulcer" were used in this search. The quality assessment of the present studies in this systematic review was based on the appraisal tool for cross-sectional studies (AXIS tool). A total of 6454 nursing students participated in ten cross-sectional studies. All students were studying at the undergraduate level and 81.20% of them were female. Nursing students were in the first (39.27%), second (28.19%), and third and fourth (32.54%) academic years. Among the participants, 49.86% have completed at least 2 clinical units. The mean scores of attitudes toward PU prevention in nursing students based on attitude toward PU prevention (APuP) and researcher-made questionnaires were 75.01% and 68.82%, respectively. The attitude of nursing students was influenced by various factors, including age, sex, academic year, clinical experience, number of clinical units, experience in caring for PU patients, previous courses on PU in the curriculum, and contribution of training to knowledge. Also, in the present study, the positive relationship between the attitude and knowledge of nursing students was shown as the only significant correlation. In sum, the attitude of the majority of nursing students toward the prevention of PUs was at a satisfactory level. Therefore, it is expected to transfer the necessary knowledge to them with proper planning so that preventive actions can be carried out by following the guidelines.
Topics: Humans; Female; Male; Ulcer; Students, Nursing; Cross-Sectional Studies; Surveys and Questionnaires; Pressure Ulcer; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Suppuration; Attitude of Health Personnel
PubMed: 37434034
DOI: 10.1111/iwj.14191 -
Journal of Tissue Viability Nov 2023To determine the monetary costs identified in economic evaluations of treatment with compression bandages among adults with venous leg ulcers (VLU). (Review)
Review
AIM
To determine the monetary costs identified in economic evaluations of treatment with compression bandages among adults with venous leg ulcers (VLU).
METHOD
A scoping review of existing publications was conducted in February 2023. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used.
RESULTS
Ten studies met the inclusion criteria. To place the costs of treatment into context, these are reported in conjunction with the healing rates. Three comparisons were made: 1.4 layer compression versus no compression (3 studies). One study reported that 4 layer compression was more expensive than usual care (£804.03 vs £681.04, respectively), while the 2 other studies reported the converse (£145 vs £162, respectively) and all costs (£116.87 vs £240.28 respectively). Within the three studies, the odds of healing were statistically significantly greater with 4 layer bandaging (OR: 2.20; 95% CI: 1.54-3.15; p = 0.001).; 2.4 layer compression versus other compression (6 studies). For the three studies reporting the mean costs per patient associated with treatment (bandages alone), over the treatment period, analysis identified a mean difference (MD) in costs for 4 layer vs comparator 1 (2 layer compression, short-stretch compression, 2 layer compression hosiery, 2 layer cohesive compression, 2 layer compression) of -41.60 (95% CI: 91.40 to 8.20; p = 0.10). The OR of healing for 4 layer compression vs comparator 1 (2 layer compression, short-stretch compression, 2 layer compression hosiery, 2 layer cohesive compression, 2 layer compression) is: 0.70 (95% CI: 0.57-0.85; p = 0.004). For 4 layer vs comparator 2 (2 layer compression) the MD is: 14.00 (95% CI: 53.66 to -25.66; p < 0.49). The OR of healing for 4 layer compression vs comparator 2 (2 layer compression) is: 3.26 (95% CI: 2.54-4.18; p < 0.00001). For comparator 1 (2 layer compression, short-stretch compression, 2 layer compression hosiery, 2 layer cohesive compression, 2 layer compression) vs comparator 2 (2 layer compression) the MD in costs is: 55.60 (95% CI: 95.26 to -15.94; p = 0.006). The OR of healing with Comparator 1 (2 layer compression, short-stretch compression, 2 layer compression hosiery, 2 layer cohesive compression, 2 layer compression) is: 5.03 (95% CI:4.10-6.17; p < 0.00001). Three studies presented the mean annual costs per patient associated with treatment (all costs). The MD is 172 (150-194; p = 0.401), indicating no statistically significant difference in costs between the groups. All studies showed faster healing rates in the 4 layer study groups. 3. Compression wrap versus inelastic bandage (one study). Compression wrap was less expensive than inelastic bandage (£201 vs £335, respectively) with more wounds healing in the compression wrap group (78.8%, n = 26/33; 69.7%, n = 23/33).
CONCLUSION
The results for the analysis of costs varied across the included studies. As with the primary outcome, the results indicated that the costs of compression therapy are inconsistent. Given the methodological heterogeneity among studies, future studies in this area are needed and these should use specific methodological guidelines to generate high-quality health economic studies.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Compression Bandages; Varicose Ulcer; Health Care Costs; Pressure; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Leg Ulcer
PubMed: 37423836
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtv.2023.06.009 -
Nursing Open Sep 2023To investigate the effectiveness of different dressings on pressure injuries and screen the dressings for efficacy. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIM
To investigate the effectiveness of different dressings on pressure injuries and screen the dressings for efficacy.
DESIGN
Systematic review and network meta-analysis.
METHODS
Articles published from several electronic databases and other resources were selected. Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed the quality of selected studies.
RESULTS
Twenty-five studies that contained data on moist dressings (hydrocolloidal dressing, foam dressing, silver ion dressing, biological wound dressing, hydrogel dressing, polymeric membrane dressing) and sterile gauze dressings (traditional gauze dressings) were included. All RCTs were at a medium to high risk of bias. Moist dressings were found to be more advantageous than the traditional dressings. Hydrocolloid dressings [RR = 1.38, 95% CI (1.18, 1.60)] showed a higher cure rate than sterile gauze dressing and foam dressings [RR = 1.37, 95% CI (1.16, 1.61)]. Silver ion dressings [RR = l.37, 95% CI (1.08, 1. 73)] showed a higher cure rate than sterile gauze dressings. Sterile gauze dressing dressings [RR = 0.51, 95% CI (0.44, 0.78)] showed a lower cure rate compared with polymeric membrane dressings; whereas Sterile gauze dressing dressings [RR = 0.80, 95% CI (0.47, 1.37)] had a lower cure rate compared to biological wound dressings. Foam and hydrocolloid dressings were associated with the least healing time. Few dressing changes were required for moist dressings.
Topics: Humans; Bandages, Hydrocolloid; Crush Injuries; Network Meta-Analysis; Polymers; Pressure Ulcer; Silver; Wound Healing
PubMed: 37386783
DOI: 10.1002/nop2.1867 -
PloS One 2023Medical device-related pressure injury (MDRPI) in intensive care unit (ICU) patients is a serious issue. We aimed to evaluate the risk factors for MDRPI associated with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Medical device-related pressure injury (MDRPI) in intensive care unit (ICU) patients is a serious issue. We aimed to evaluate the risk factors for MDRPI associated with ICU patients through systematic review and meta-analysis, and provide insights into the clinical prevention of MDRPI.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang Database, and China BioMedical Literature Database (CBM) (from inception to January 2023) for studies that identified risk factors of MDRPI in ICU patients. In order to avoid the omission of relevant literature, we performed a secondary search of the above database on February 15, 2023. Meta-analysis was performed using Revman 5.3.
RESULTS
Fifteen studies involving 4850 participants were selected to analyze risk factors for MDRPI in ICU patients. While conducting a meta-analysis, we used sensitivity analysis to ensure the reliability of the results for cases with significant heterogeneity among studies. When the source of heterogeneity cannot be determined, we only described the risk factor. The risk factors for MDRPI in ICU patients were elder age (OR = 1.06, 95% CI: 1.03-1.10), diabetes mellitus (OR = 3.20, 95% CI: 1.96-5.21), edema (OR = 3.62, 95% CI: 2.31-5.67), lower Braden scale score (OR = 1.22, 95%CI: 1.11-1.33), higher SOFA score (OR = 4.21, 95%CI: 2.38-7.47), higher APACHE II score (OR = 1.38, 95%CI: 1.15-1.64), longer usage time of medical devices (OR = 1.11, 95%CI: 1.05-1.19), use of vasoconstrictors (OR = 6.07, 95%CI: 3.15-11.69), surgery (OR = 4.36, 95% CI: 2.07-9.15), prone position (OR = 24.71, 95% CI: 7.34-83.15), and prone position ventilation (OR = 17.51, 95% CI: 5.86-52.36). Furthermore, we found that ICU patients who used subglottic suction catheters had a higher risk of MDRPI, whereas ICU patients with higher hemoglobin and serum albumin levels had a lower risk of MDRPI.
CONCLUSION
This study reported the risk factors for MDRPI in ICU patients. A comprehensive analysis of these risk factors will help to prevent and optimize interventions, thereby minimizing the occurrence of MDRPI.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Pressure Ulcer; Reproducibility of Results; Intensive Care Units; Critical Care; Crush Injuries; Risk Factors
PubMed: 37352180
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0287326