Assessing predictive validity of the modified Braden scale for prediction of pressure ulcer risk of orthopaedic patients in an acute care setting

Aims and objectives. To assess and compare the predictive validity of the modified Braden and Braden scales and to identify which of the modified Braden subscales are predictive in assessing pressure ulcer risk among orthopaedic patients in an acute care setting. Background. Although the Braden scale has better predictive validity, literature has suggested that it can be used in conjunction with other pressure ulcer risk calculators or that some other subscales be added. To increase the predictive power of the Braden scale, a modified Braden scale by adding body build for height and skin type and excluding nutrition was developed. Design. A prospective cohort study. Method. A total of 197 subjects in a 106‐bed orthopaedic department of an acute care hospital in Hong Kong were assessed for their risk for pressure ulcer development by the modified Braden and Braden scales. Subsequently, daily skin assessment was performed to detect pressure ulcers. Cases were closed when pressure ulcers were detected. Results. Out of 197 subjects, 18 patients (9·1%) developed pressure ulcers. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the modified Braden scale was 0·736 and for the Braden scale was 0·648. The modified Braden cut‐off score of 19 showed the best balance of sensitivity (89%) and specificity (62%). Sensory perception (Beta = ?1·544, OR=0·214, p = 0·016), body build for height (Beta = ?0·755, OR = 0·470, p = 0·030) and skin type (Beta = ?1·527, OR = 0·217, p = 0·002) were significantly predictive of pressure ulcer development. Conclusion. The modified Braden scale is more predictive of pressure ulcer development than the Braden scale. Relevance to clinical practice. The modified Braden scale can be adopted for predicting pressure ulcer development among orthopaedic patients in an acute care setting. Specific nursing interventions should be provided, with special attention paid to orthopaedic patients with impaired sensory perception, poor skin type and abnormal body build for height.     

Validity of the Waterlow scale for pressure ulcer risk assessment in the intensive care unit: a prospective analysis of 698 patients

Critically ill patients are at a particular risk for developing pressure ulcers. Yet until now, no sufficiently specific, validated pressure ulcer risk assessment instruments exist for critically ill patients. In a prospective study of 698 patients of medical intensive care unit (ICU), we therefore analyzed if the Waterlow scale is suitable for pressure ulcer risk assessment in the ICU. Only patients with no pressure ulcer on admission to the ICU were included. The Waterlow scale was used to assess pressure ulcer risk on admission to the ICU, and the number of points on the scale were analyzed with regard to pressure ulcers development in the course of the ICU stay (121 patients). Our results show that adequate pressure ulcer risk assessment on admission to the ICU is not possible with the Waterlow scale. Sensitivity and specificity reached their maximal values of 64.6% and 48.8%, respectively, at a comparably high cut-off of 30 points on the Waterlow scale (positive and negative likelihood ratio being 1.26 and 0.73, respectively). The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.59 in the receiver-operator-characteristic curve. Adding intensive care related parameters to the scale yielded some degree of improvement (AUC 0.69), but the development of ICU specific pressure ulcer risk scales still seems to be necessary to allow reliable pressure ulcer risk assessment in the ICU.     

Pressure ulcer risk assessment immediately after cardiac surgery – does it make a difference? A comparison of three pressure ulcer risk assessment instruments within a cardiac surgery population

The intensive care unit (ICU) population has a high risk of developing pressure ulcers. According to several national expert guidelines for pressure ulcer prevention, a risk assessment for every situation in which the patient's condition is changing should be performed using a standardized risk assessment instrument. The aims of this study were to (a) assess the number of patients who are 'at risk' for the development of pressure ulcer according to three commonly used risk assessment instruments in the intermediate period after cardiac surgery procedures, (b) assess which instrument best fits the situation of the ICU patients and c) decide if 'static' risk assessment with an instrument should be recommended. The modified Norton scale, the Braden scale and the 4-factor model were used in a convenience sample of 53 patients to assess the risk for development of pressure ulcer in the first 5 days (in ICU) after cardiac surgery procedures. The number of patients at risk were >60% by the 4-factor model, >70% by the modified Norton scale and >80% by the Braden scale. Sensitivity and specificity in all scales were not satisfactory. Forty-nine per cent (n= 26) of the patients developed a pressure ulcer in the operating room, 13% (n= 7) up to day 5 in the cardiac surgery ICU. Only 1.9% (n= 1) of the pressure ulcers were stage 2. The study concluded that the patients in the cardiac surgery ICU can be identified as at risk during the first 5 days after surgical procedure without continuously using a standardized risk assessment instrument in every changing condition. Individual risk assessment by a standardized risk assessment instrument is only recommended to enable initiation of preventive measures based on patient-specific risk factors.     

Predicting pressure ulcer risk: a multifactorial approach to assess risk factors in a large university hospital population

Aims. The purpose of this study was: (1) to determine the combination of risk factors which best predicts the risk of developing pressure ulcers among inpatients in an acute care university hospital; (2) to determine the appropriate weight for each risk factor; and (3) to derive a concise and easy‐to‐use risk assessment tool for daily use by nursing staff. Background. Efficient application of preventive measures against pressure ulcers requires the identification of patients at risk. Adequate risk assessment tools are still needed because the predictive value of existing tools is sometimes unsatisfactory. Design. Survey. Methods. A sample of 34,238 cases admitted to Essen University Clinics from April 2003 and discharged up to and including March 2004, was enrolled into the study. Nursing staff recorded data on pressure ulcer status and potential risk factors on admission. Predictors were identified and weighted by multivariate logistic regression. We derived a risk assessment scale from the final logistic regression model by assigning point values to each predictor according to its individual weight. Results. The period prevalence rate of pressure ulcers was 1·8% (625 cases). The analysis identified 12 predictors for developing pressure ulcers. With the optimum cut‐off point sensitivity and specificity were 83·4 and 83·1%, respectively, with a positive predictive value of 8·4% and a negative predictive value of 99·6%. The diagnostic probabilities of the derived scale were similar to those of the original regression model. Conclusions. The predictors mostly correspond to those used in established scales, although the use of weighted factors is a partly novel approach. Both the final regression model and the derived scale show good prognostic validity. Relevance to clinical practice. The derived risk assessment scale is an easy‐to‐understand, easy‐to‐use tool with good prognostic validity and can assist in effective application of preventive measures against pressure ulcer.     

Prevalence, risk factors and prevention of pressure ulcers in Dutch intensive care units

OBJECTIVE: Evaluating the prevalence, risk factors and prevention of pressure ulcers in Dutch intensive care units (ICUs). DESIGN: Cross-sectional design. SETTING: ICUs of acute care hospitals that participated in the 1998 and 1999 national prevalence surveys. Data were collected on 1 day in each year. PATIENTS: Eight hundred fifty patients admitted to Dutch ICUs. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Six categories of data were collected: (1) characteristics of the institution, (2) characteristics of the ward, (3) characteristics of the patients (age, sex, date of admission, reason for admission), (4) risk assessment using the Braden scale and two additional risk factors (malnutrition and incontinence), (5) severity of the pressure ulcers and (6) supportive surface used. The prevalence of pressure ulcers was 28.7%. In a forward logistic regression analysis, four risk factors were significantly associated with the presence of pressure ulcers: infection, age, length of stay and total Braden score. Of the patients at high risk of developing pressure ulcers but without actual pressure ulcers, 60.5% were positioned on a support system. Only 36.8% of the patients who were determined to need repositioning were actually being turned. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of pressure ulcers in Dutch ICUs is high and their prevention is flawed, especially as regards the use of support systems. Patients for whom turning is indicated are not being turned. Predicting pressure ulcers in ICU patients is difficult and needs further investigation.     

压疮危险因素评估表预测不同患者群体压疮发生的研究

目的比较压疮危险因素评估表（Norton ulcer risk assessment scale,以下简称Norton量表）对不同年龄组及不同病区患者压疮的预测效果。方法运用Norton量表对内外科住院患者进行连续评估,计算量表对不同患者群体预测的灵敏度、特异性、预测值。结果 Norton量表对老年患者灵敏度96.96%、特异性87.68%、阳性预测值22.96%,阴性预测值99.87%;对中青年患者灵敏度97.37%、特异性96.73%、阳性预测值12.05%、阴性预测值99.98%,Norton量表对老年患者及中青年患者压疮预测均具有较高的灵敏度和特异性。Norton量表对内科、外科及不同病区患者均具有较高的预测灵敏度;对神经外科、ICU患者预测特异性较低。结论 Norton量表对不同年龄组和不同病区患者皆具有较好的预测效果,内外科各病区可以统一使用Norton量表对患者进行压疮高危筛查和评估。     

Adherence to pressure ulcer prevention guidelines in home care: a survey of current practice

Aims and objectives. To investigate the pressure ulcer prevalence in home nursing patients and to evaluate guideline adherence of measures for the prevention of pressure ulcers and the participation of informal carers in pressure ulcer prevention. Background. Since 2002, the Belgian Guideline for the Prevention of Pressure Ulcers was published on the Internet, but no information was available on guideline adherence in home care. Methods. A cross‐sectional survey of pressure ulcer prevalence and guideline adherence was performed in a cluster randomized sample of 2779 clients of nine regional nursing departments in Flanders, Belgium. The Belgian Guideline for the Prevention of Pressure Ulcers was the reference standard for the evaluation of the guideline adherence. Results. There were 744 subjects at risk for developing pressure ulcers. The overall prevalence of pressure ulcers for the total sample population was 6·8%. The age‐, sex‐ and risk‐standardized prevalence per regional department varied between 4·9% and 9·1%. Of the 744 subjects at risk, 33 (4·4%) received preventive measures, which were in adherence to the Belgian Guideline for Prevention of Pressure Ulcers, 482 persons (64·8%) were administered measures, which did not adhere to the Belgian Guideline for Prevention of Pressure Ulcers and in 229 subjects (30·8%) at risk for developing pressure ulcers, prevention was lacking. For subjects with at least one pressure ulcer, the proportions were: 4·8% adherence, 76·6% no adherence and 18·6% no prevention. A proportion of 22·2% of the patients at risk and their informal carers were informed and motivated by the home care nurse to participate in the pressure ulcer prevention and their actual participation in the prevention was 21·4% of all risk cases. Conclusions. The adherence of nurses and clients to the guideline for pressure ulcer prevention was low. Relevance to the clinical practice. The study demonstrates a detailed evaluation of guideline adherence to pressure ulcer prevention in an individual patient situation, with special attention for materials and measures, which are not adequate and not recommended by the Belgian Guideline for the Prevention of Pressure Ulcers.     

The identification of older nursing home residents vulnerable for deterioration of grade 1 pressure ulcers

Aims and objective. The objective of this study was to identify prognostic factors associated with the development of pressure ulcer lesions (grade 2–4) in nursing home patients with non‐blanchable erythema. Background. No studies could be found that identify risk factors for further development of pressure ulcer in patients with non‐blanchable erythema. For some patients with non‐blanchable erythema, standard preventive measures do not suffice to prevent pressure ulcers from deterioration. Identifying these patients beforehand can considerably contribute to the efficiency of pressure ulcer prevention. Design. Secondary data analyses of a previously conducted randomised controlled trial were performed. Methods. Eighty‐four wards of 16 Belgian nursing homes participated in the study. In total, 235 nursing home residents with a grade 1 pressure ulcer (non‐blanchable erythema) were included. All the residents received standard preventive care. Potential prognostic factors were collected using a standardised form. The incidence of pressure ulcers was recorded according to the European pressure ulcer classification system. Results. The cumulative pressure ulcer incidence was 18·7% (44/235). Hypotension (relative risk = 3·42, 95% CI = 1·56–7·49), a history of a cerebral vascular accident (relative risk = 1·94, 95% CI = 1·10–3·70) and contractures (relative risk = 2·02, 95% CI 1·03–3·95) were identified as independent predictive factors for developing pressure ulcers. Remarkably, being urinary incontinent decreased the risk of developing a pressure ulcer by 76%. Conclusions. In nursing home residents with non‐blanchable erythema, hypotension, contractures, and a history of cerebral vascular accident were independent risk factors for the development of pressure ulcer lesions. Relevance to clinical practice. Patients with non‐blanchable erythema who have hypotension, contractures or a history of cerebral vascular accident are in need of more intensive preventive measures. Identifying these patients can contribute considerably to a more efficient pressure ulcer prevention policy, resulting in a lower pressure ulcer lesion incidence and in lower costs.     

Non-blanchable erythema as an indicator for the need for pressure ulcer prevention: a randomized-controlled trial

Aims and objectives. To evaluate whether postponing preventive measures until non‐blanchable erythema appears will actually lead to an increase in incidence of pressure ulcers (grades 2–4) when compared with the standard risk assessment method. Background. To distinguish patients at risk for pressure ulcers from those not at risk, risk assessment scales are recommended. These scales have limited predictive validity. The prevention of further deterioration of non‐blanchable erythema (grade 1 pressure ulcer) instead of the standard way of assigning prevention could be a possible new approach. Design. Randomized‐controlled trial. Methods. Patients admitted to surgical, internal or geriatric wards (n = 1617) were included. They were randomly assigned to an experimental and a control group. In the experimental group (n = 826), prevention was started when non‐blanchable erythema appeared, in the control group (n = 791) when the Braden score was <17 or when non‐blanchable erythema appeared. In both groups, patients received identical prevention, either by using a polyethylene–urethane mattress in combination with turning every four hours or by using an alternating pressure air mattress. Pressure points were observed daily and classified according to the four grades of the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel. The Braden scale was scored every three days. Results. In the experimental group, 16% of patients received preventive measures, in the control group 32%. The pressure ulcer incidence (grades 2–4) was not significantly different between the experimental (6·8%) and control group (6·7%). Conclusion. Significantly fewer patients need preventive measures when prevention is postponed until non‐blanchable erythema appears and those patients did not develop more pressure ulcers than patients who received prevention based on the standard risk assessment method. Relevance to clinical practice. Using the appearance of non‐blanchable erythema to allocate preventive measures leads to a considerable reduction of patients in need of prevention without resulting in an increase in pressure ulcers.     

Pressure ulcers: validation of two risk assessment scales

Aims and objectives. To compare the predictive value of two pressure ulcer risk assessment scales (Braden and Norton) and of clinical judgement. To evaluate the impact of effective preventive measures on the predictive validity of the two risk assessment scales. Methods. Of the 1772 participating older patients, 314 were randomly selected and assigned to the ‘turning’ group; 1458 patients were assigned to the ‘non‐turning’ group. Using the Braden and the Norton scale the pressure ulcer risk was scored twice weekly during a four‐week period. Clinical assessment was monitored daily. The patients at risk in the ‘turning’ group (Braden score <17 or Norton score <12) were randomly assigned to a two‐hour turning schedule or to a four‐hour turning schedule in combination with a pressure‐reducing mattress. The ‘non‐turning’ group received preventive care based on the clinical judgement of the nurses. Results. The diagnostic accuracy was similar for both scales. If nurses act according to risk assessment scales, 80% of the patients would unnecessarily receive preventive measures. The use of effective preventive measures decreased the predictive value of the risk assessment scales. Nurses predicted pressure ulcer development less well than the Braden and the Norton scale. Only activity, sensory perception, skin condition and existence of old pressure ulcers were significant predictors of pressure ulcer lesions. Relevance to clinical practice. The effectiveness of the Norton and Braden scales is very low. Much needless work is done and expensive material is wrongly allocated. The use of effective preventive measures decreases the predictive value of the risk assessment scales. Although the performance of the risk assessment scales is poor, using a risk assessment tool seems to be a better alternative than relying on the clinical judgement of the nurses.     

Factors associated to pressure ulcers in patients at adult Intensive Care Units

The objective of this a cross-sectional analytical study was to estimate the occurrence of pressure ulcers and their associated factors in adult ICUs in the city of Belo Horizonte, Brazil. The sample consisted of 142 patients aged 18 or older, admitted before midnight of the day prior to data collection, from a total of 316 beds distributed in 22 ICUs. Presence of at least one pressure ulcer per patient was 35.2% (CI 95% = 27.4-47.7). Of the 99 ulcers identified, the ones in the sacral region were most frequent (36.0%), followed by those in the calcaneus (22.0%). We observed that the presence of sepsis (OR = 6.04, CI 95% = 1.09-33.53), period of stay > or = 10 days (OR = 7.61, CI 95% = 2.92-19.82) and being high risk and very high-risk in the Braden scale (OR = 4.96, CI 95% = 1.50-16.50) were independent factors significantly associated with the presence of pressure ulcers. Results suggest that sepsis, length of stay, and having high and very high risk" in the Braden scale are factors potentially associated to the development of ulcers in bedridden patients.     

ICU患者压疮发生危险因素分析

目的：探讨导致ICU患者压疮发生的危险因素。方法：采用自行设计的“ICU患者压疮风险因素调查表”记录735例ICU患者的患病情况、主要治疗情况等资料。结果：性别、糖尿病、脑卒中、入ICU时间、是否持续进行动脉血压监测、水肿、平均动脉压、乳酸Lac、心率、Apachell评分是ICU患者发生压疮的影响因素。结论：ICU患者压疮发生是多因素共同参与的病理生理过程,护理人员应充分认识各种危险因素对ICU患者发生压疮的影响,对存在或可能存在危险因素的ICU患者实施重点防护以减少压疮的发生。     

Immobility--a major risk factor for development of pressure ulcers among adult hospitalized patients: a prospective study

OBJECTIVE: To identify risk factors associated with pressure ulcer development among adult hospitalized medical and surgical patients. DESIGN: A prospective comparative study including 530 adult patients from medical and surgical wards. Registered Nurses made the data collection on admission and once a week for up to 12 weeks. The risk assessment scale used was the Risk Assessment Pressure Sore (RAPS) scale, including the following variables; general physical condition, activity, mobility, moisture, food intake, fluid intake, sensory perception, friction and shear, body temperature and serum albumin. RESULTS: Sixty-two (11.7%) patients developed 85 pressure ulcers. The most common pressure ulcer was that of nonblanchable erythema. Patients who developed pressure ulcers were significantly older, hospitalized for a longer time, had lower scores on the total RAPS scale, had lower weight and lower diastolic blood pressure than nonpressure ulcer patients did. In the multiple logistic regression analyses using variables included in the RAPS scale immobility emerged as a strong risk factor. When adding remaining significant variables in the analyses, mobility, time of hospitalization, age, surgical treatment and weight were found to be risk factors for pressure ulcer development. CONCLUSION: It is confirmed that immobility is a risk factor of major importance for pressure ulcer development among adult hospitalized patients. The results also indicate that the RAPS scale may be useful for prediction of pressure ulcer development in clinical practice.     

Incidence of pressure ulcers in a neurologic intensive care unit

OBJECTIVES: To determine the risk factors for pressure ulceration in an intensive care setting, to evaluate the Braden scale as a predictor of pressure ulcer risk in critically ill patients, and to determine whether pressure ulcers are likely to occur early in the hospital stay. DESIGN: Cohort study of patients with no preexisting ulcers with a 3-month enrollment period. SETTING: The neurologic intensive care unit and the neurologic intermediate unit at a primary care/referral hospital with a level I trauma center. PATIENTS: A total of 186 patients entered the study. INTERVENTION: Within 12 hrs of admittance, initial assessment, photographs, and Braden score were completed. Patients were re-examined every 4 days or at discharge from the unit, whichever came first. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Determining risk factors for pressure ulcers, performing detailed statistical analyses, and testing the usefulness of the Braden score as a predictor of pressure ulcer risk. RESULTS: Twenty-three of 186 patients developed at least one pressure ulcer (incidence = 12.4%) after an average stay of 6.4 days. The Braden scale, which measures six characteristics of skin condition and patient status, proved to be a primary predictor of ulcer development. No ulcers developed in the 69 patients whose Braden score was 16 or higher. The likelihood of developing a pressure sore was predicted mathematically from the Braden score. However, being underweight was a significant and distinct factor in pressure ulcer development. CONCLUSIONS: Pressure ulcers may develop within the first week of hospitalization in the intensive care unit. Patients at risk have Braden scores of < or = 16 and are more likely to be underweight. These results suggest that aggressive preventive care should be focused on those patients with Braden scores of < or = 13 and/or a low body mass index at admission.     

Validity of pressure ulcer risk assessment scales; Cubbin and Jackson, Braden, and Douglas scale

This study was to compare the validity of three pressure ulcer risk tools: Cubbin and Jackson, Braden, and Douglas scales. Data were collected three times per week from 48 to 72 h after admission based on the three pressure ulcer risk assessment scales and skin assessment tool developed by the Panel for the Prediction and Prevention of Pressure Ulcers (1994) from 112 intensive care unit (ICU) patients in a educational hospital Ulsan, Korea during December 11, 2000 to February 10, 2001. When a patient developed a pressure ulcer at the time of assessment, the patient was classified into 'pressure ulcer group', and when patients did not have a pressure ulcer until they died, moved to other wards or were discharged from the hospital, they were classified into 'not pressure ulcer group'. Four indices of validity and area under the curves (AUC) of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) were calculated. Based on the cut-off point presented by the developer, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value were as follows: Cubbin and Jackson scale: 89%, 61%, 51%, 92%, respectively, Braden scale: 97%, 26%, 37%, 95%, respectively, and Douglas scale: 100%, 18%, 34%, 100%, respectively. AUCs of ROC curve were 0.826 for Cubbin and Jackson, 0.707 for Braden, and 0.791 for Douglas. Overall, the Cubbin and Jackson scale showed the best validity among scales tested and we recommended it for this ICU.     

Pressure ulcer risk in long-term units: prevalence and associated factors

AIM: This paper is a report of a study to assess pressure ulcer prevalence in a group of long-term units and to describe the main factors associated both with risk for and presence of a pressure ulcer. BACKGROUND: Despite being potentially preventable, pressure ulcers are highly frequent among institutionalized patients and are associated with increased morbidity and mortality. METHOD: A cross-sectional study was carried out, involving 571 patients from 10 long-term units in Rome, Italy. Healthcare staff in each unit evaluated pressure ulcer risk and collected clinical data while a single Registered Nurse assessed all patients to identify pressure ulcers. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed for the two outcomes: condition at risk for pressure ulcers (Braden score < or = 16) and pressure ulcer presence. The data were collected in February-March 2005. FINDINGS: The overall prevalence of pressure ulcers was 27%. Multivariate analysis showed a statistically significant positive association between high-risk condition of pressure ulcer and previous stroke (OR = 1.96; 95% CI 1.30-2.96), previous trauma (OR = 1.83; 95% CI 1.12-2.99) and cognitive decline (OR associated with a 1 point Short Portable Mental State Questionnaire increase = 1.26; 95% CI 1.05-1.50). The model for pressure ulcer presence confirmed a statistically significant excess in patients with cardiovascular diseases (OR = 1.79; 95% CI 1.13-2.85), with high Activity of Daily Living scores (OR associated with a 1 point increase 1.38; 95% CI 1.03-1.84) and low Braden Scale scores (OR associated with a 1 point increase = 0.80; 95% CI 0.70-0.87). The risk of pressure ulcers according to number of full-time nurses and auxiliary staff per 10 beds lower than five was marginally statistically significant (OR = 1.60; 95% CI 0.98-2.61). CONCLUSION: Further research is needed to validate our findings and further prospective research is needed to identify ways of preventing pressure ulcers. Our data on staffing suggest that organizational factors should be taken into account when exploring determinants of pressure ulcers.