Pressure ulcer prevention in intensive care patients: guidelines and practice

Background  Pressure ulcers are a potential problem in intensive care patients, and their prevention is a major issue in nursing care. This study aims to assess the allocation of preventive measures for patients at risk for pressure ulcers in intensive care and the evidence of applied pressure ulcer preventive measures in intensive care settings in respect to the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (EPUAP) and Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR) guidelines for pressure ulcer prevention.
Design  The design of this study was a cross-sectional study (point prevalence).
Setting  The study setting was intensive care units. The sample consisted of 169 patients – 60 patients from surgical wards, 59 from interdisciplinary wards and 50 from medical intensive care wards.
Results  The study results revealed that pressure reducing devices like mattresses (alternating pressure air, low air loss and foam) are applied for 58 (36.5%) patients, and all of these patients are at risk for pressure ulcer development. Most patients receive more than one nursing intervention, especially patients at risk. Nursing interventions applied are skin inspection, massage with moisture cream, nutrition and mobility (81.8%, 80.5%, 68.6% and 56.6%) respectively. Moreover, all applied pressure ulcer preventive measures in this study are in line with the guidelines of the EPUAP and AHCPR except massage which is applied to 8.8% of all patients.
Conclusions  The use of pressure reducing devices and nursing interventions in intensive care patients are in line with international pressure ulcer guidelines. Only massage, which is also being used, should be avoided according to the recommendation of national and international guidelines.     

Senior nurses' control expectations and the development of pressure ulcers

AIM: The aim of this research was to establish whether the attitudes and expectations of senior nursing staff might adversely affect patient outcomes in the prevention of pressure ulcers. The hypothesis was that nursing locus of control affects clinical outcomes in patients. In particular, it affects departmental prevalence of pressure damage. METHOD: A population of nurses (n = 439) in an acute and community NHS trust were surveyed to test knowledge, control beliefs and value of pressure ulcer prevention relative to prevalence. The research was designed to provide different data against which to test the hypothesis: first, to assess acceptability of nurses' knowledge of prevention and appropriate use of risk assessment and equipment; second, to calculate a mean departmental pressure ulcer prevalence; and third, to measure locus of control and value, which is the focus of this article. RESULTS: There were strong associations between departmental prevalence of pressure ulcers and attitudes of senior nursing staff. For example, the more that ward sisters believed they could control pressure ulcer prevention, the higher the prevalence of ulcers in their department. The more that sisters believed that they could not control prevalence, the lower the prevalence of ulcers. CONCLUSION: The study shows that failure to account for beliefs, values and expectations of staff could lead to patient harm. It is suggested that it might be counterproductive to put great effort into developing clinical guidelines and refinement of risk assessment methods. The findings have important implications for nursing, and challenge the assumption that nurse leaders are universally beneficial to patients.     

The first national pressure ulcer prevalence survey in county council and municipality settings in Sweden

Aim To report data from the first national pressure ulcer prevalence survey in Sweden on prevalence, pressure ulcer categories, locations and preventive interventions for persons at risk for developing pressure ulcers. Methods A cross‐sectional research design was used in a total sample of 35 058 persons in hospitals and nursing homes. The methodology used was that recommended by the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel. Results The prevalence of pressure ulcers was 16.6% in hospitals and 14.5% in nursing homes. Many persons at risk for developing pressure ulcers did not receive a pressure‐reducing mattress (23.3–27.9%) or planned repositioning in bed (50.2–57.5%). Conclusions Despite great effort on the national level to encourage the prevention of pressure ulcers, the prevalence is high. Public reporting and benchmarking are now available, evidence‐based guidelines have been disseminated and national goals have been set. Strategies for implementing practices outlined in the guidelines, meeting goals and changing attitudes must be further developed.     

Pressure ulcer prevention in nursing homes: views and beliefs of enrolled nurses and other health care workers

Background. In the Netherlands much attention has been paid to pressure ulcer prevention. National guidelines on pressure ulcer prevention were developed in 1985 and adapted in 1992 at the request of a national organization for quality assurance in health care. Several studies indicate that nurses seem to be insufficiently informed about pressure ulcer preventive activities. There is, however, no information available about the reasons why nurses seem to be insufficiently informed. Aims and objectives. This study was planned to elucidate the views and beliefs of health care workers (especially enrolled nurses) in Dutch nursing homes about pressure ulcer prevention and about issues related with pressure ulcer prevention. Design. A qualitative study with semi‐structured, tape‐recorded interviews. Method. Interviews were conducted with enrolled nurses, team leaders, head nurses, staff nurses and physicians. The interviews were coded and analysed. Results. Analysis of the interviews revealed that today's pressure ulcer preventive activities are very much based on old traditions in nursing. It also showed that enrolled nurses have no intention to change the care they deliver with regard to pressure ulcer prevention. Conclusions. It is concluded that a systematic approach is necessary to change nursing thinking and acting with regard to pressure ulcer prevention. Relevance to clinical practice. This study gives an overview of the views and beliefs of health care workers (especially enrolled nurses) in Dutch nursing homes about pressure ulcer prevention. These views and beliefs can be used as a starting point for effective implementation of guidelines regarding the prevention of pressure ulcers.     

Improving pressure ulcer prevention through education

Pressure ulcers adversely affect the quality of life of many patients and cause anxiety and distress for their families. Pressure ulcer prevention and management is an integral part of nursing practice, but despite numerous policies and guidelines, research, and improvements in equipment, the incidence and prevalence of pressure ulcers have not fallen. In this article, the author examines issues involved in promoting more effective pressure ulcer management.     

Pressure ulcers: implementation of evidence-based nursing practice

AIMS: A 2-year project was carried out to evaluate the use of multi-component, computer-assisted strategies for implementing clinical practice guidelines. This paper describes the implementation of the project and lessons learned. The evaluation and outcomes of implementing clinical practice guidelines to prevent and treat pressure ulcers will be reported in a separate paper. BACKGROUND: The prevalence and incidence rates of pressure ulcers, coupled with the cost of treatment, constitute a substantial burden for our health care system. It is estimated that treating a pressure ulcer can increase nursing time up to 50%, and that treatment costs per ulcer can range from US$10,000 to $86,000, with median costs of $27,000. Although evidence-based guidelines for prevention and optimum treatment of pressure ulcers have been developed, there is little empirical evidence about the effectiveness of implementation strategies. METHOD: The study was conducted across the continuum of care (primary, secondary and tertiary) in a Canadian urban Health Region involving seven health care organizations (acute, home and extended care). Trained surveyors (Registered Nurses) determined the prevalence and incidence of pressure ulcers among patients in these organizations. The use of a computerized decision-support system assisted staff to select optimal, evidence-based care strategies, record information and analyse individual and aggregate data. RESULTS: Evaluation indicated an increase in knowledge relating to pressure ulcer prevention, treatment strategies, resources required, and the role of the interdisciplinary team. Lack of visible senior nurse leadership; time required to acquire computer skills and to implement new guidelines; and difficulties with the computer system were identified as barriers. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for a comprehensive, supported and sustained approach to implementation of evidence-based practice for pressure ulcer prevention and treatment, greater understanding of organization-specific barriers, and mechanisms for addressing the barriers.     

Explaining the national differences in pressure ulcer prevalence between the Netherlands and Germany – adjusted for personal risk factors and institutional quality indicators

Background Pressure ulcers have a known impact on quality of life as well as on morbidity and mortality of the persons affected. Remarkable differences in pressure ulcer prevalence between the Netherlands and Germany have been found during the last 6 years. This study explores to what extent the individual risk of the population and quality indicators of the institutions can explain the variation in national prevalence. Methods Data of a binational multi‐centred cross‐sectional study in 103 hospitals (n = 21 378 patients) and 129 nursing homes (n = 15 579 residents) were analysed using random effects regression models to calculate the differences in national prevalences within the nursing homes and hospitals, adjusted for personal risk for pressure ulcer and quality indicators. Results The prevalence of pressure ulcers among the at‐risk group (Bradenscore ≤20) in nursing homes was 30.8% in the Netherlands and 8.3% in Germany [OR: 4.9 (CI 95%: 4.2–5.7)]. In hospitals, the prevalence among the at‐risk group was 26.1% in the Netherlands and 21.2% in Germany [OR: 1.3 (CI 95%: 1.2–1.5)]. After adjusting for individual risk factors (age, gender, Bradenscore) as well as for quality structures (use of prevention and treatment protocols, experts groups, information leaflets, nurses training, central pressure ulcer statistics and regular updating of protocols), the chance of developing a pressure ulcer was 6.05 times higher (CI 95%: 4.0–9.2) in a Dutch nursing home than in a German nursing home. Within the hospitals, the OR for Dutch patients was 2.03 (CI 95%: 1.4–3.0). Conclusion A remarkable national variation exists in pressure ulcer prevalence and nursing practice. Neither the populations vulnerability for pressure ulcers nor pressure ulcer management as measured in this study could explain this national variation. Therefore, other risk factors should be taken into consideration. Additionally, it is possible that quality indicators are implemented in differing ways with varying levels of effectiveness. Therefore, further research is needed to examine prospectively and in more detail the reality of care within facilities in both countries.     

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.     

A cost-effective pressure damage prevention strategy

This article describes the development of a pressure ulcer prevention strategy, with the aim of establishing if the implementation of best practice would impact on the incidence of pressure ulcers in a healthcare setting. The strategy was piloted in a large 78-bedded nursing home. A full audit of the patients' notes and existing care pathways was conducted in order to inform the structure of the prevention plan. It was found that there were no protocols for the use of Cavilon barrier products and that it was not part of a standard care pathway. A prevention strategy was designed based on these findings and an education package delivered to all staff. Training in the appropriate use of Aderma (TM) Dermal Pads was also provided so that they could be put in place as an early preventative measure in patients at risk of pressure damage or those showing the symptoms. The results of the study showed that by establishing a best practice care pathway, the incidence of pressure ulcers could be reduced.     

Pressure ulcer prevention and treatment practices in inpatient rehabilitation facilities.

Although many strategies have been developed to prevent pressure ulcers, they remain a significant healthcare problem, particularly for chronically ill patients in rehabilitation facilities. This study describes self-reported pressure ulcer prevention and treatment practices in rehabilitation facilities. Surveys were sent to all 52 licensed inpatient rehabilitation facilities in Missouri; the response rate was 76.9%. Less than 30% of the facilities used inexpensive nursing interventions such as keeping the head of a patient's bed at or below a level of 30 degrees. Informally established protocols were used more frequently than the evidence-based pressure ulcer prevention and treatment guidelines issued by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. Furthermore, only 50% of the respondent facilities used established, valid, and reliable risk assessment tools. There was little difference in the interventions used when a client either developed a pressure ulcer or was assessed as being at risk for an ulcer. These findings reveal a significant gap between research and practice and suggest a need to educate rehabilitation nurses about the most appropriate, evidence-based nursing interventions for preventing and treating pressure ulcers.     

Risk, prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers--nursing staff knowledge and documentation

The aims were to investigate (i) registered nurses' and nursing assistants' knowledge of risk, prevention and treatment of pressure ulcer before implementing a system for risk assessment and pressure ulcer classification for patients with hip fracture (ii) interventions documented in the patient's records by registered nurses, and (iii) to what extent reported and documented interventions accord with the Swedish quality guidelines. Nursing staff (n=85) completed a questionnaire, and patient's records (n=55) were audited retrospectively. The majority of the nursing staff reported that they performed risk assessment when caring for a patient with hip fracture. These risk assessments were, however, not comprehensive. The most frequently reported preventive interventions were repositioning, use of lotion, mattresses/overlays and cushions for the heels. These interventions were to some extent documented in the patient's records. Nutritional support, reduction of shear and friction, hygiene and skin moisture, and patient's education were reported to a small extent and not documented at all. The Swedish quality guidelines regarding prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers were not fully implemented in clinical practice. It was concluded that nursing staff's knowledge and documentation of risk, prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers for patients with hip fractures could be improved.     

Pressure ulcer prevalence and incidence in intensive care patients: a literature review

Background: Pressure ulcers remain a common health problem worldwide within the different health‐care settings, especially in intensive care settings. Aims: The aims of this were to systematically assess the recent prevalence and incidence of pressure ulcers in intensive care patients (2000–2005), the factors related to pressure ulcer prevalence and incidence and the methodological rigour of studies about pressure ulcer prevalence and incidence in intensive care patients. Methods: The research design involved a review of literature for the period of 2000 to 2005, focused on the prevalence and incidence of pressure ulcers in intensive care patients. Results: The analysis of published papers revealed variations in pressure ulcer prevalence in intensive care settings ranging from 4% in Denmark to 49% in Germany, while incidence ranged from 38% to 124%. There was a wide variation in the prevalence and incidence of pressure ulcers in intensive care patients as evidenced in the studies examined. There is also a gap between theory and practice in the prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers which needs to be addressed. Conclusion: Further research is needed regarding the effectiveness of nursing care on pressure ulcer development and into treatments that may successfully prevent their occurrence in intensive care patients.     

全球压疮发生率和现患率分析及启示

介绍了美国、英国、欧洲其他国家压疮发生率和现患率的研究及其结果，认为压疮发生率和现患率不容乐观。简要分析了我国压疮预防的现状，提出迫切需要制定符合我国国情和需要的压疮预防实践指南，迫切需要进行多中心、大样本量的压疮发生率和现患率调研。     

Preventing and managing heel pressure ulceration: an overview

Heel pressure ulcers are the second most common site for pressure ulceration; although their assessment and treatment can be complex, and they often require additional consideration over and above core principles of pressure ulcer prevention and management. Recent international pressure ulcer prevention and treatment guidelines developed jointly in Europe and the USA have provided greater clarity by achieving international consensus on how to care for patients at risk of heel pressure ulceration, and also on the management of such patients if a pressure ulcer develops. Health professionals should embrace these guidelines and embed them in their everyday clinical practice and within local guidance and protocols to ensure that patients are provided with evidence-based care supported by international collaboration and agreement.     

Nurses' attitudes, behaviours and perceived barriers towards pressure ulcer prevention

Background. Pressure ulcers are not a plague of modern man; they have been known to exist since ancient Egyptian times. However, despite the increasing expenditure on pressure ulcer prevention, pressure ulcers remain a major health care problem. Although nurses do not have the sole responsibility for pressure ulcer prevention, nurses have a unique opportunity to have a significant impact on this problem. Aims and objectives. The specific aims of the study were to identify: ? Staff nurses’ attitudes towards pressure ulcer prevention. ? The behaviour of staff nurses’ in relation to pressure ulcer prevention. ? Staff nurses’ perceived barriers towards pressure ulcer prevention. Design. A cross‐sectional survey method was used. Methods. A randomly selected sample of staff nurses (n = 300) working in an acute care setting in an urban location was invited to participate. Data were collected using a prepiloted questionnaire. Data analysis was carried out using SPSS version 10 and SPSS Text Smart version 1.1. Results. The nurses surveyed demonstrated a positive attitude towards pressure ulcer prevention. However, prevention practices were demonstrated to be haphazard and erratic and were negatively affected by lack of time and staff. These barriers prevented the nurses’ positive attitude from being reflected into effective clinical practice. Education, although poorly accessed, or made available, was rarely cited as impeding practice in this area. Conclusion. This study suggests that positive attitudes are not enough to ensure that practice change takes place, reinforcing the complex nature of behavioural change. Implementation strategies should introduce ways in which key staff can be empowered to overcome barriers to change. Relevance to clinical practice. This study provides a unique exploration of Irish nurses’ attitudes, behaviours and perceived barriers towards pressure ulcer prevention, thereby contributing to the body of knowledge on this subject. As tissue viability is a new and emerging speciality, this information will contribute to evidence based practice in this area of patient care and will form the basis for the development of an educational strategy for pressure ulcer prevention and management.     

A 4-cm thermoactive viscoelastic foam pad on the operating room table to prevent pressure ulcer during cardiac surgery

Aims and objectives. In this experimental study, a 4‐cm thermoactive viscoelastic foam overlay and a heating source on the operating room table was compared with the standard operating room table with a heating source for the effect on the postoperative pressure ulcer incidence in cardiac surgery patients. Background. Pressure ulcer incidence in the cardiac surgery population is reported to be up to 29·5%. The prolonged compressive forces from lying on the operating room table are one source of pressure ulcer development in this population. Pressure‐reducing devices on the operating room (OR)‐table should reduce the patients’ interface pressure and thus the hazard of skin breakdown. Methods. A randomized controlled trial was performed to test the effect of a 4‐cm thermoactive viscoelastic foam overlay with a water‐filled warming mattress on the OR‐table (test OR‐table) compared with the standard OR‐table (a water‐filled warming mattress, no pressure‐reducing device) on the postoperative pressure ulcer incidence in cardiac surgery patients. Instruments. The pressure ulcer classification system of the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (EPUAP) was used for pressure ulcer grading. Results. The results show that patients lying on the 4‐cm thermoactive viscoelastic foam overlay suffer slightly more pressure ulcer (17·6%) than patients on the standard OR‐table without the foam overlay (11·1%). Because of the clinical relevance of the results, the randomized controlled trial was terminated after 175 patients at the interim analysis although the power calculation stated 350 patients. Conclusions. The combination of a 4‐cm viscoelastic foam overlay and a warming source cannot be recommended for pressure ulcer prevention on the operating room table. Relevance to clinical practice. Foam overlays are used to prevent pressure ulcers in patients. It is necessary to use such devices according to patient safety and use of resources.     

Differences in prevalence of pressure ulcers between the Netherlands and Germany--associations between risk, prevention and occurrence of pressure ulcers in hospitals and nursing homes

Aim. This study compares pressure ulcer prevalence and prevention activities in nursing homes and hospitals within two European countries. Background. Over three years stable differences have been found between the Netherlands (NL) and Germany (GER) with higher pressure ulcer rates in the NL. As previous analyses have shown, the differences cannot be entirely explained by differences in the population’s vulnerability to pressure ulcers because they still remain after risk adjustment. Therefore, the differences in prevalence must be caused by other factors. The purpose of this study is to analyse if any potential differences in preventive activities can account for the varying occurrence of pressure ulcers. Method. In both countries, nation-wide surveys were conducted annually using the same standardised questionnaires. Trained nurses examined all consenting patients of the voluntarily participating facilities. This examination included a skin assessment of the entire body. Data regarding risk factors, prevention and details about wounds were then collected. Results. In-patients of 29 German (n = 2531) and 71 Dutch (n = 10 098) nursing homes and 39 German (n = 8515) and 60 Dutch (n = 10 237) hospitals were investigated. The use of pressure-reducing devices was more common in the NL than in GER, but all other interventions were more frequently provided to German risk patients than to their Dutch counterparts. The pressure ulcer prevalence was significantly higher in the Dutch sample. After adjusting for gender, age, Braden Score and prevention, the probability of having a pressure ulcer was 8·1 times higher for Dutch nursing home residents than for German residents. Conclusion. Some of the variance in pressure ulcer prevalence between the two countries can be explained by varying pressure ulcer prevention. However, some remarkable differences still remain unexplained. Relevance to clinical practice. The extent of pressure ulcer prevention, especially repositioning and nutrition intervention provided to patients at risk, is not in accordance with international guidelines.     

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.     

A Nurse‐Led Approach to Preventing Pressure Ulcers

This article discusses a nurse‐led multidisciplinary approach that care providers can use to reduce pressure ulcers (PUs) within their organizations. Given the current understanding of PU etiology and prevention, evidence‐based prevention protocols and pressure‐relief strategies serve as critical foundational principles that must be applied to significantly influence PU prevalence and incidence. Because nursing plays an important role in rehabilitation facility management, nurses' expertise, leadership, and knowledge make nursing the most appropriate discipline to design protocols, implement innovative solutions, and lead the charge for PU prevention.     

Nurses’ pressure ulcer related judgements and decisions in clinical practice: A systematic review

BackgroundPressure ulcers are considered to be an adverse outcome of care that should never occur in clinical practice. The formation of a pressure ulcer is also perceived to be an indicator of poor quality nursing care. Therefore, pressure ulcer prevention is a priority for nurses, healthcare professionals and healthcare organisations throughout the world. A key factor in pressure ulcer prevention and management is individual nurse decision making.ObjectivesTo synthesise the literature on the judgement and decision making of nurses in relation to the assessment, prevention, grading and management of pressure ulcers in all care settings (hospital and community).DesignA systematic search of published literature relating to judgement and decision making in nurses, with a focus on the prevention and management of pressure ulcers.MethodsA search of electronic databases from 1992 to present, together with hand searching of the reference lists of retrieved publications, to identify published papers that reported results of studies evaluating the decision making of nurses in relation to the prevention and management of pressure ulcers. Abstracts were independently reviewed by two authors and full text of potentially relevant articles retrieved. Each paper included in this systematic review was evaluated using recognised appraisal criteria relevant to the specific study design. Included papers provided empirical data on key aspects of nurses’ pressure ulcer related judgements and decision making. Data were synthesised into themes using narrative analysis.ResultsSixteen studies and one systematic review were included in the review, focusing on pressure ulcer risk assessment, pressure ulcer prevention, grading of pressure ulcers and treatment decisions. The results indicated that assessment tools were not routinely used to identify pressure ulcer risk, and that nurses rely on their own knowledge and experience rather than research evidence to decide what skin care to deliver.ConclusionsEmphasising pressure ulcer risk assessment and pressure ulcer grading in clinical practice is unlikely to deliver improved outcomes. Further research into nurses’ pressure ulcer related judgements and decision making is needed and clinicians must focus on the consistent delivery of high quality care to prevent and mange pressure ulcers to all patients in clinical practice.