Development and psychometric validation of PUKAT 2·0, a knowledge assessment tool for pressure ulcer prevention

The aim of this study was to develop a tool to measure the knowledge of nurses on pressure ulcer prevention. PUKAT 2·0 is a revised and updated version of the Pressure Ulcer Knowledge Assessment Tool (PUKAT) developed in 2010 at Ghent University, Belgium. The updated version was developed using state‐of‐the‐art techniques to establish evidence concerning validity and reliability. Face and content validity were determined through a Delphi procedure including both experts from the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (EPUAP) and the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP) (n = 15). A subsequent psychometric evaluation of 342 nurses and nursing students evaluated the item difficulty, discriminating power and quality of the response alternatives. Furthermore, construct validity was established through a test–retest procedure and the known‐groups technique. The content validity was good and the difficulty level moderate. The discernment was found to be excellent: all groups with a (theoretically expected) higher level of expertise had a significantly higher score than the groups with a (theoretically expected) lower level of expertise. The stability of the tool is sufficient (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient = 0·69). The PUKAT 2·0 demonstrated good psychometric properties and can be used and disseminated internationally to assess knowledge about pressure ulcer prevention.     

Hospital-acquired pressure ulcers in two Swedish County Councils: cross-sectional data as the foundation for future quality improvement

The objectives of the study were to examine the prevalence of pressure ulcers and hospital-acquired pressure ulcers (HAPU) and identify modifiable factors in patients who develop HAPU as the basis for subsequent quality assurance studies and improvement in hospital care. The study was conducted in five hospitals in two Swedish County Councils. A 1-day prevalence study (n = 1192) using the standards of the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel and Collaborative Alliance for Nursing Outcomes was conducted. The prevalence of ulcers was 14·9% and 11·6% were HAPU. Older age, more days of hospitalisation, less activity, problems with shear and friction and reduced sensory perception contributed significantly to HAPU. Pressure ulcer prevention strategies used more often in those with HAPU were risk assessment at admission, provision of a pressure relief mattress, having a turning schedule and using a heel or chair cushion. The prevalence of pressure ulcers continues to be a significant issue in acute care and the prevalence of HAPU is high. There is significant room for quality improvement in pressure ulcer prevention in Swedish hospitals. Future research needs to address both HAPU and community-acquired pressure ulcers and focus on preventive strategies, including when they are initiated and which are effective in mitigating the high HAPU rate.     

Optimal use of negative pressure wound therapy in treating pressure ulcers

Pressure ulcers (PrUs) are a challenging health concern for both the clinician and the patient. The exact incidence and prevalence of PrUs varies widely among specific clinical populations, from 0.4% to 38% in acute care, from 2.2% to 24% in long-term care and from 0% to 17% in home care. The economic impact of these wounds is impressive with an estimated cost of $11 to $17.2 billion annually in the USA. Guidelines from the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel and European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel have provided recommendations for the prevention and treatment of PrUs. Negative pressure wound therapy with reticulated open cell foam (NPWT/ROCF; V.A.C.? Therapy, KCI USA, Inc. San Antonio, TX) has been successfully used for managing PrUs. This review combines expert opinion with scientific evidence to describe the use of NPWT/ROCF in patients with PrUs.     

Recurring pressure ulcers: Identifying the definitions. A National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel white paper

Currently, there is a lack of consensus regarding the accepted terminology pertaining to the pressure ulcer healing progression and recidivism. This lack of uniformity can negatively impact initiation of treatment pathways, completion of appropriate interventions, clinical documentation, medical coding, patient education, discharge planning and healthcare revenue through out the healthcare system. The purpose of this paper is to introduce a standard nomenclature as it pertains to pressure ulcer healing progression and any recidivism that may occur. The National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel has formulated a framework of terms regarding pressure ulcer progression. We also developed a clearer nomenclature for lack of progress and recidivism of pressure ulcers. This document should serve as a starting point for the discussion of the pressure ulcer care, research, and terminology.     

Clinical and epidemiologic evaluation of pressure ulcers in patients at a university hospital in Turkey.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to measure the incidence of pressure ulcer development at a university health center in Turkey, and to determine whether the Waterlow Pressure Sore Risk (PSR) Scale score predicted pressure ulcer development, stage, or number of ulcers. DESIGN: We prospectively evaluated patients who were hospitalized at our university-based medical center. SETTING AND SUBJECTS: We analyzed data from 22,834 patients hospitalized at the Baskent University Adana Teaching and Medical Research Center in Ankara, Turkey from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2004, including 360 patients who developed pressure ulcers. INSTRUMENTS: The Waterlow PSR Scale was used to assess pressure ulcer risk. In addition, age, sex, the ward or unit in which the patient was hospitalized, reason for hospitalization, and location and stage of ulcers were collected on a data form designed specifically for this study. METHODS: A single nurse physiotherapist assessed all patients daily during their hospitalization. When a pressure ulcer was diagnosed by the nurse physiotherapist, a physician staged the pressure ulcers based on the US National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP) staging system. RESULTS: Three hundred sixty out of 22,834 patients developed 1 or more pressure ulcers, resulting in an incidence rate of 1.6%. Most ulcers (59.2%) occurred in patients hospitalized in the intensive care unit (n = 213). A positive correlation between the Waterlow PSR Scale score and number of ulcers per patient (r: 0.178, P < .01) was identified. No significant correlation was found linking Waterlow PSR Scale score and ulcer stage or the development of a single ulcer. CONCLUSION: We found significantly lower pressure ulcer incidence rates than those commonly reported in the literature, which we believe is principally attributable to short hospital stays and a strong emphasis on preventive nursing care. While high Waterlow PSR scale Scores correlated positively with development of multiple ulcers, this did not predict ulcer stage or the presence of a single pressure ulcer.     

Pressure ulcer prevalence across Welsh orthopaedic units and community hospitals: surveys based on the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel minimum data set

The survey used the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (EPUAP) methodology for the collection of pressure ulcer prevalence data. The orthopaedic survey was conducted across all National Health Service Trusts in Wales between 2 and 6 July 2007 while the community hospital survey covering 25% of all community hospital beds was conducted between 21 April 2008 and 2 May 2008. Data were gathered upon 1196 patients (581, 48·6% within orthopaedic units with 615 located in community hospitals). Of these patients, 81 (13·9%) and 162 (26·7%) had pressure ulcers in orthopaedic and community hospitals, respectively. Where patients presented with multiple pressure ulcers, the most severe pressure ulcer was recorded. Across both surveys, most pressure ulcers were reported to be either category I or II with 91 category I wounds (33 in orthopaedic units and 58 in community hospitals). Severe (categories III and IV) pressure ulcers affected 78 patients (19 in orthopaedic units and 59 in community hospitals). Adoption of the EPUAP pressure ulcer prevalence methods can help achieve consistent data upon pressure ulcer prevalence in different health care organisations and specialities. The adoption of a consistent data collection capture methodology is a clear prerequisite for the compilation of meaningful pressure ulcer prevalence data sets at a national level.     

Definitions of the physical properties of pressure ulcers and characterisation of their regional variance

A pressure ulcer is a localised injury of the skin and underlying tissue that usually develops over a bony prominence. A decrease in the pressure over the bony prominence effectively prevents pressure ulcers; however, no studies have systematically assessed the physical properties of existing pressure ulcers. To characterise pressure ulcers, we established new terminology that clarifies the physical properties of pressure ulcers: wound mobility was defined as movement using the bony prominence as a predefined specific marker, and wound deformity was defined as a change in the three‐dimensional shape of the wound. Observational studies using this terminology showed that the distinct physical properties of pressure ulcers depend on the site of development and the wound depth according to the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel criteria. Most grade IV sacrum pressure ulcers exhibited mobility and deformity. Superficial sacrum pressure ulcers below grade II showed only mobility. In contrast, foot pressure ulcers did not exhibit mobility or deformity. We propose a new concept, ‘wound physical property’, for understanding the unique pathogenesis of pressure ulcers.     

Medical device related pressure ulcers in hospitalized patients

Most pressure ulcers occur over bony prominences such as heels and the sacrum. However, the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel recognises that pressure ulcers can also occur on any tissue under pressure and thereby can develop beneath medical devices. This article reports on results from a secondary analysis of existing data collected by The Nebraska Medical Center on pressure ulcer quality improvement initiatives and outcomes. The purpose of this study was to quantify the extent of the problem and identify risk factors for medical device related (MDR) pressure ulcer development in hospitalised patients. A subset of data collected during eight quarterly pressure ulcer incidence and prevalence studies (N = 2178) was created and analysed. The overall rate of hospital‐acquired pressure ulcers was 5·4% (113 of 2079). The proportion of patients with hospital‐acquired ulcers related to medical devices was 34·5% (39 of 113). Findings indicate that if a patient had a medical device, they were 2·4 times more likely to develop a pressure ulcer of any kind. Numerous risk factors for pressure ulcer development were identified; however, none differentiated between those with MDR and traditional pressure ulcers.     

臀部穿支皮瓣治疗老年患者骶尾部褥疮的疗效

目的探讨应用臀部穿支皮瓣治疗老年患者骶尾部褥疮的临床效果。方法 2005年1月-2010年6月,收治29例老年骶尾部褥疮患者。男16例,女13例;年龄61～75岁,平均68岁。病程5个月～10年,中位病程5.5年。根据美国国家褥疮顾问小组(NPUAP)标准分度:Ⅲ度褥疮11例,Ⅳ度18例。褥疮范围7 cm×6 cm～12 cm×10 cm。合并症:脑血管障碍8例,老年痴呆6例,截瘫11例,其他4例。术中采用大小为8 cm×6 cm～14 cm×12 cm的臀部穿支皮瓣修复创面。供区直接缝合。结果术后2 d 3例(10.3%)皮瓣远端出现部分坏死,其余患者皮瓣均顺利成活,创面Ⅰ期愈合,Ⅰ期愈合率为(89.7%)。供区切口均Ⅰ期愈合。术后1周2例(6.9%)褥疮基底发生感染,术后10 d 1例(3.4%)发生伤口裂开,均经对症处理后愈合。术后27例获随访,随访时间6个月～5年,平均3年。术后1、3年,2例褥疮复发,其中1例死于全身感染,1例行单纯清创缝合术后愈合;其余患者褥疮均未复发,皮瓣质地、颜色及弹性均恢复良好。结论臀部穿支皮瓣治疗老年患者骶尾部褥疮,只要严格掌握手术适应证,充分做好术前准备,早期手术,可取得良好的治疗效果。     

Should we include deep tissue injury in pressure ulcer staging systems? The NPUAP debate

This year's annual conference of the US National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP) included a consensus meeting to evaluate the current NPUAP pressure ulcer staging system. Jeannie Donnelly recounts the lively debate that ensued.     

EPUAP pressure ulcer prevalence survey in Sweden: a two-year follow-up of quality indicators.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the effects of quality improvement programs for pressure ulcer prevention by conducting a follow-up survey in a hospital in Sweden. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey design with comparison between data collected in 2002 and 2004. SETTING AND SUBJECTS: All inpatient areas were surveyed in the surgical, medical, and geriatric departments in a university hospital. A total of 369 patients were included. INSTRUMENTS: The European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel data collection form including some additional questions. METHODS: The 1-day survey was conducted on March 23, 2004. Each patient was visited by 2 registered nurses, who inspected the patient's skin for any pressure ulcer classified according to the EPUAP grading system. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in gender, age, or Braden score between the patients in surgical, medical, or geriatric care in 2002 and 2004. The overall prevalence of pressure ulcers was 33.3% (grade 1 excluded: 10.9%) in 2002 and 28.2% (grade 1 excluded: 14.1%) in 2004. In surgical care, the prevalence was reduced from 26.8% to 17.3% (P = .051). In medical care, the prevalence was 23.6% in 2002 and 26.7% in 2004. Corresponding prevalence figures for geriatric care were 59.3% and 50.0%. A quarter of the patients in surgical care, a third in medical care, and more than half in geriatric care had a pressure ulcer upon arrival at the ward. The use of pressure-reducing mattresses had increased significantly from 16.0% to 42.7% in medical care (P = .000). CONCLUSIONS: The EPUAP methodology has facilitated the introduction of pressure ulcer as a quality indicator at hospital level. Pressure ulcer prevalence surveys with a standardized methodology should be repeated on a regular basis in order to stimulate quality improvement.     

The biomechanics of sitting-acquired pressure ulcers in patients with spinal cord injury or lesions

Sitting-acquired pressure ulcers (SAPU) in permanent wheelchair users with traumatic or non traumatic disorders of the central nervous system (CNS) are a great medical challenge. The purpose of this review is to summarise what is currently known concerning the aetiology of SAPU, particularly in its severe form, which may now be classified as a 'deep tissue injury' according to the US National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel. Specifically, this review focuses on biomechanical aspects of deep SAPU and describes the relevant bioengineering methodologies and research evidence. It discusses the unique biomechanical conditions in deep tissues, which are caused by chronic sitting associated with CNS disorders, and overall, the present review indicates that avoiding interface pressures above 32 mmHg in such patients is not necessarily a 'pressure relief.'     

Subepidermal moisture detection of pressure induced tissue damage on the trunk: The pressure ulcer detection study outcomes

We examined the relationship between subepidermal moisture measured using surface electrical capacitance and visual skin assessment of pressure ulcers at the trunk location (sacral, ischial tuberosities) in 417 nursing home residents residing in 19 facilities. Participants were on average older (mean age of 77 years), 58% were female, over half were ethnic minorities (29% African American, 12% Asian American, and 21% Hispanic), and at risk for pressure ulcers (mean score for Braden Scale for Predicting Pressure Ulcer Risk of 15.6). Concurrent visual assessments and subepidermal moisture were obtained at the sacrum and right and left ischium weekly for 16 weeks. Visual assessment was categorized as normal, erythema, stage 1 pressure ulcer, Deep Tissue Injury or stage 2+ pressure ulcer using the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel 2009 classification system. Incidence of any skin damage was 52%. Subepidermal moisture was measured with a dermal phase meter where higher readings indicate greater moisture (range: 0–70 tissue dielectric constant), with values increasing significantly with the presence of skin damage. Elevated subepidermal moisture values co‐occurred with concurrent skin damage in generalized multinomial logistic models (to control for repeated observations) at the sacrum, adjusting for age and risk. Higher subepidermal moisture values were associated with visual damage 1 week later using similar models. Threshold values for subepidermal moisture were compared to visual ratings to predict skin damage 1 week later. Subepidermal moisture of 39 tissue dielectric constant units predicted 41% of future skin damage while visual ratings predicted 27%. Thus, this method of detecting early skin damage holds promise for clinicians, especially as it is objective and equally valid for all groups of patients.     

Risk Assessment for Pressure Ulcers: An Adaptation of the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel Risk Factors to Spinal Cord Injured Patients

ABSTRACT

To estimate risk factors for pressure ulcers, we developed quantitative definitions for each of the nine general areas of risk outlined by the 1989 National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP) and evaluated each of these factors in a group of spinal cord injured patients by means of a retrospective chart review at a spinal cord injury referral center serving the New England area. All patients (n=364) admitted to the spinal cord injury service between January 1, 1989 and December 31, 1990 were studied.

We identified a pressure ulcer in 81 of 364 patients (22.3 percent). In the univariate analyses, pressure ulcers were associated with Frankel groups A to B with an odds ratio (OR) of 5.7 (95 percent confidence interval 2.8 to 11.9), low albumin with an OR of 4.9 (95 percent confidence interval 2.8 to 8.6), low hemoglobin with an OR of 2.5 (95 percent confidence interval 1.5 to 4.1), age ≥60 years with an OR of 1.9 (95 percent confidence interval 1.2 to 3.2) and three independent measures of co-morbidity: Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS) with an OR of 3.7 (95 percent confidence interval 2.1 to 6.3), Charlson Index with an OR of 2.2 (95 percent confidence interval 1.3 to 3.8), and International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification count with an OR of 4.2 (95 percent confidence interval 2.4 to 7.2). In the logistic regression model, low albumin, CIRS and Frankel grade A to B and history of pressure ulcers were predictors. This study demonstrates that the NPUAP criteria can be adapted and quantified for spinal cord injured patients who are at high risk for pressure ulcers.     

Incidence and prevalence of pressure ulcers in cancer patients admitted to hospice: A multicentre prospective cohort study

Pressure ulcers lead to discomfort for patients and may have an important impact on a patient''s quality of life. Measure the incidence and prevalence of pressure ulcers in a Hospice environment; evaluate the risk factors associated with pressure ulcers; and calculate the incidence of Kennedy Terminal Pressure Ulcers. This multicentre prospective cohort study enrolled 440 cancer patients in advanced phase, consecutively admitted to five hospices of the AUSL della Romagna (Italy), during a period of 1 year. Five hundred more patients were excluded from the study because of inability to sign the consent form or refusal to participate. All patients were adults above 18 years of age. The National Pressure Advisory Panel Classification System was used to evaluate the pressure ulcers. Potential risk predictors were evaluated through the Braden Scale, the Numerical Scale, and the Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia Scale. Starting in September 2016, 214 (48.6%) females and 226 (51.4%) males were analysed. The incidence of pressure ulcers in the total population was 17.3%. The risk factors that influence the development of pressure ulcers were age, proximity to death, and duration of stay in Hospice. The incidence of Kennedy Terminal Pressure Ulcers was 2.7%. This study demonstrates that 17.3% of all patients admitted to a hospice setting developed a pressure ulcer. The longer the patients stay in hospice and the clinical condition deteriorates, the higher the risk of developing a pressure ulcer.     

Diagnosing brain death: the importance of documenting clinical test results

Eighty-three cases of brain stem death referred to the South Thames Transplant Co-ordination Service were audited to determine the quality of brain stem death test records. Documentation of brain stem death tests were complete in only 41 (44%) cases at the time of referral. There was no significant difference in completeness, whether documentation was in patient's notes or on a designated checklist (p = 0.14). There were a greater number of omissions when the tests were documented in patient's notes rather than on a form (p = 0.01). There is a necessity to improve the quality of brain stem death test documentation in order to facilitate organ donation and safeguard the integrity of brain stem death testing. This requires a commitment by clinicians to improve the quality of documentation, which can be accomplished by recording all aspects of brain stem death tests, including the conclusion on a single designated checklist.