Predictive risk scales for development of pressure ulcers in pediatric patients admitted to general ward and intensive care unit

BACKGROUNDMore than ten special scales are available to predict the risk of pressure ulcers in children. However, the performances of those scales have not yet been compared in China. AIMTo compare the Waterlow, Braden Q, and Glamorgan scales, and identify more suitable pressure ulcer evaluation scale for the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU).METHODSTrained nurses used the Waterlow, Braden Q, and Glamorgan scales to assess pediatric patients at Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital (China) within 24 h of admission from May 2017 to December 2020 in two stages. Skin examination was carried out to identify pressure ulcers every 3 d for 3 wk. RESULTSThe incidence of pressure ulcers was 3/28 (10.7%) in the PICU and 5/314 (1.6%) in the general pediatric ward. For children in the general ward, the Waterlow, Braden Q, and Glamorgan scales had comparable area under the operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.870, 0.924, and 0.923, respectively, and optimal cut-off values of 14, 14, and 29 points. For PICU, the Waterlow, Braden Q, and Glamorgan scales had slightly lower AUC of 0.833, 0.733, and 0.800, respectively, and optimal cut-off values of 13, 16, and 27 points. Braden Q demonstrated a satisfactory specificity, and during the second stage of the study for PICU patients, the AUC of the Braden Q scale was 0.810, with an optimal cut-off value of 18.35 points.CONCLUSIONThe Waterlow, Braden Q, and Glamorgan scales have comparable performance, while the Braden Q scale demonstrates a better specificity and can be successfully used by pediatric nurses to identify patients at high risk of pressure ulcers in PICU.     

The clinical relevance of the waterlow pressure sore risk scale in the ICU

Objective: To evaluate whether the Waterlow pressure sore risk (PSR) scale has prognostic significance for intensive care patients. Design: A prospective study. Setting: The surgical intensive care unit (ICU) of the University Hospital Rotterdam. Patients: Data were evaluated from 594 patients who had been admitted to the ICU during the year 1994. Methods and results: Each patient was assessed daily with respect to their Waterlow PSR score and the development of pressure sores in the sacral region. Actuarial statistical methods were used to analyse the predictive value of the risk score. When a patient had a Waterlow PSR score > 25 on admission, the risk of developing a pressure sore was significantly increased compared to patients with a PSR score < 25. After admission, the daily Waterlow PSR scores obtained were significantly associated with the risk of developing a pressure sore. For each additional point this risk increased by 23 % (95 % confidence interval 17 to 28 %). Conclusions: The Waterlow PSR scale provides the medical and nursing staff at an early stage with reliable information about the risk patients have in developing a pressure sore. Received: 8 August 1997 Accepted: 24 April 1998     

Predicting the risk of pressure ulcers in critically ill patients.

BACKGROUND: Critically ill patients are at high risk for pressure ulcers. OBJECTIVES: To determine the contributions of the Braden subscales in predicting pressure ulcers in critically ill patients and to investigate how often the Braden scale should be completed to assess the risk for pressure ulcers in critically ill patients. METHOD: The Braden scale was used to assess repeatedly 136 adult patients without pressure ulcers in a medical intensive care unit, a surgical intensive care unit, and a noninvasive respiratory care unit, and the patients' skin was inspected routinely for pressure ulcers. RESULTS: A total of 36 pressure ulcers, most commonly on the sacrum or coccyx and the heels (15 stage 1, 20 stage 2, 1 stage 3), developed in 17 patients (12%). In 14 (82%) of the 17, the ulcers developed within 72 hours of admission to the intensive care unit. The risk for pressure ulcers increased as the mean sensory perception (P = .01) and the mean total Braden (P = .046) scores decreased. The mean sensory perception scores obtained at 12 and 36 hours after admission also had a significant relationship to the risk for pressure ulcers (P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Patients in intensive care units have an increased risk for pressure ulcers. Although waiting until 12 hours after a patient's admission to the intensive care unit to obtain the initial Braden rating may be reasonable (with the second rating obtained 36 hours after admission), additional research is needed before this practice can be recommended.     

Development of a new risk assessment scale for predicting pressure ulcers in an intensive care unit

Aims and objectives: The study aimed to evaluate the predictive validity and accuracy of a new pressure ulcer risk assessment scale in two Indonesia intensive care units (ICUs). Background: Several risk assessment scales have been designed to identify patients at risk of developing pressure ulcers in ICU. However, the relative weight of each variable that contributes to pressure ulcer development in these scales is not described to enable designing of a risk assessment scale. Currently, the risk factors contributing to pressure ulcer development include interface pressure, body temperature and cigarette smoking. Design: A prospective cohort study was conducted in two ICUs in Pontianak, Indonesia. Methods: A total of 253 patients were recruited to the study from both hospitals. Data collection included new risk assessment scale [i.e. the Suriadi and Sanada (S.S.) scale] scoring, demographic, pressure ulcer severity scores (based on the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel) and skin condition measures. Using the S.S. scale, trained data collectors scored patients once and assessed the body temperature daily until patients were discharged. Additionally, daily data were also collected in relation to the patient‘s skin condition and stage of pressure ulcer. Results: Out of the 253 patients, 72 (28·4%) developed pressure ulcers. In ICU A, the incidence was 27%; pressure ulcers developed into stage I (41·7%), stage II (45·8%), stage III (10·4%) and stage IV (2·1%). In ICU B, the incidence was 31·6%; the development of pressure ulcers was 48% in stage I and 52% in stage II. Using the predictive validity test, the S.S. scale balanced sensitivity (81%) and specificity (83%) at a cut‐off score of 4. The area under the receiver‐operating characteristic curve was 0·888 (confidence interval: 0·84–0·93). Conclusion: The S.S. scale was found to be a valid risk assessment tool to identify the patients at risk of developing pressure ulcers in Indonesia ICU.     

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.     

重症监护室患者非骨隆突部位压疮原因分析及对策

目的：分析重症患者非骨隆突部位压疮的原因并提出相应护理对策.方法：收集从2011年12月～2012年12月我医院重症监护室收治的40例非骨隆突部位压疮患者的临床资料并进行回顾性分析,同时研究防治非骨突部位压疮的主要对策.结果：重症监护室患者头面部、上肢、腰背臀部是非骨突部位发生压疮的主要部位.结论：分析重症监护患者非骨隆突部位压疮发生的原因,并进行危险因素评估,采取针对性的护理措施利于降低重症患者非骨突部位压疮的发生率.     

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.     

Guideline implementation results in a decrease of pressure ulcer incidence in critically ill patients

OBJECTIVE: To describe the short-term and long-term effects of a hospital-wide pressure ulcer prevention and treatment guideline on both the incidence and the time to the onset of pressure ulcers in critically ill patients. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Adult intensive care department of a university medical center. PATIENTS: Critically ill patients (n = 399). INTERVENTIONS: A guideline for pressure ulcer care was implemented on all intensive care units. The attention of nurses for timely transfer to a specific pressure-reducing device was an important part of this guideline. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patient characteristics, demographics, pressure ulcer risk profile at admission, daily pressure ulcer grading, and type of mattress were determined to describe the short-term and long-term effects 3 and 12 months after the implementation. The incidence density of pressure ulcers grade II-IV decreased from 54 per 1000 patient days at baseline to 32 per 1000 days (p = .001) 12 months after the implementation. The median pressure ulcer-free time increased from 12 days to 19 days (hazard rate ratio, 0.58; p = .02). After adjustment for differences in risk factors in a Cox proportional hazard model, the number of preventive transfers to special mattresses was the strongest indicator for the decreased risk of pressure ulcers (hazard rate ratio, 0.22; p < .001). The number needed to treat to prevent one pressure ulcer during the first 9 days was six. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a guideline for pressure ulcer care resulted in a significant and sustained decrease in the development of grade II-IV pressure ulcers in critically ill patients. Timely transfer to a specific mattress (i.e., transfer before the occurrence of a pressure ulcer) was the main indicator for a decrease in pressure ulcer development.     

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.     

3种压疮危险评估量表在老年患者中应用的信效度研究

目的 比较和评价Norton、Braden和Waterlow 3种压疮危险评估量表在老年患者中应用的信效度.方法 选取某三级甲等医院老年患者271例,运用3种量表连续评估患者的压疮危险,以Cronbach's α系数、内容效度指数、因子分析、ROC曲线等方法评价和比较各量表的信效度.结果Norton、Braden、Watedow量表的内部一致性信度分别为0.71、0.79、0.32;内容效度指数分别为0.85、0.91、0.87;因子分析得到的方差累计贡献率分别为71.73%、70.34%、65.76%;灵敏度和特异度分别为(0.75、0.62)、(0.74、0.59)、(0.86、0.59).结论 Waterlow量表的内部一致性信度低,但预测能力最好;Braden量表的信效度均高,但预测能力偏低.     

An evaluation of the Waterlow pressure ulcer risk-assessment tool

The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE, 2001) stated that in order to achieve clinical governance strategies, risk management in the form of pressure ulcer risk assessment will contribute to improved quality of patient care. Risk-assessment tools must display high-predictive values, be highly sensitive and specific, reliable, and easy and convenient to use. Despite their extensively documented poor performance, pressure ulcer risk-assessment scales play a primary role in the prevention and management of pressure ulcers. The tools attempt to determine patients' risk status by quantifying a range of the most commonly recognized risk factors. Although there are over 40 different assessment tools, the Waterlow pressure ulcer risk-assessment tool is the tool that is most widely used in the UK. This article aims to review studies relating to the reliability, content validity, predictive validity, concurrent validity and the construct validity of the Waterlow pressure ulcer risk-assessment tool.     

Waterlow计分表在神经内科预防压疮中的应用

目的评价Waterlow计分表对神经内科卧床患者压疮的预测效果。方法应用Waterlow计分表作为评估工具,通过对新入神经内科患者进行评估,根据分值采用不同的预防措施。结果 2014年神经内科压疮高危患者上报率显著增加(P0.01),高危患者院内压疮发生率显著下降(P0.01)。结论 Waterlow计分表应用于神经内科临床预防压疮具有可靠性、有效性。     

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。     

Comparing Norton, Braden and Waterlow risk assessment scales for pressure ulcers in spinal cord injuries

When pressure ulcers occur health care services are faced with considerable challenges and costs. Additionally these ulcers cause significant physical and psycho-social impairment for patients and their families. The complexity of pressure ulcer management is widely acknowledged in the literature. However, the applicability of the major risk assessment scales in the context of spinal cord injury has not been explored. Retrospective case history audit of individuals with pressure ulcers provided data to compare the three commonly used Norton, Braden and Waterlow scales. Waterlow's scale was the most sensitive of the three scales compared.     

Waterlow量表在高龄住院患者压疮危险因素评估中的应用

目的应用Waterlow量表评估高龄住院患者压疮危险因素,探讨Waterlow量表对高龄患者压疮风险评估及检测效果。方法按方便取样法,选取42例80岁以上高龄患者运用Waterlow量表进行评估,观察Waterlow量表的评估结果及评估条目频次分布情况。结果入选42例高龄患者的Waterlow评分均≥20分,计分均值为（38±10．35）分,均为有压疮发生极高危患者;排名前9大危险因素有皮肤颜色差、外周血管病变、运动／感觉缺陷、皮肤干燥、多器官功能衰竭、特殊药物治疗、皮肤薄如纸、体重指数低于中等水平和糖尿病。结论Waterlow量表能有效预测高龄患者压疮发生危险因素,但有过度预测可能和指标细化的空间。     

Pressure relief bedding to prevent pressure ulcer development in critical care

One major risk for the critically ill patient is the development of pressure ulcers during the intensive care unit (ICU) stay. These patients have many of the risk factors for the development of pressure ulcers including reduced mobility/activity, medications, neurologic deficits, increasing age, incontinence, decreased mental status, poor nutrition, pressure, shear forces, and friction. Pressure ulcers are known to be costly for the health care system and delay recovery in many patients. Different strategies have been advocated for the prevention of pressure ulcers, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) has identified the use of pressure relief bedding as a means to prevent the development of pressure ulcers during hospitalization. The use of pressure relief bedding has received the most research attention to date. The focus of this article is to describe the state of the current research in this area and how this applies to critical care. Development of protocols and guidelines for the use of pressure ulcer preventing strategies are important to improve the quality of care in the ICU.There is still a need to examine the impact of the evidence of pressure ulcer prevention in the ICU and this review should help to build a framework for future research and protocol development.     

Predictive validity of the Braden Scale,Norton Scale,and Waterlow Scale in the Czech Republic

The aim of this study was to determine the predictive validity of the Braden, Norton, and Waterlow scales in 2 long‐term care departments in the Czech Republic. Assessing the risk for developing pressure ulcers is the first step in their prevention. At present, many scales are used in clinical practice, but most of them have not been properly validated yet (for example, the Modified Norton Scale in the Czech Republic). In the Czech Republic, only the Braden Scale has been validated so far. This is a prospective comparative instrument testing study. A random sample of 123 patients was recruited. The predictive validity of the pressure ulcer risk assessment scales was evaluated based on sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. The data were collected from April to August 2014. In the present study, the best predictive validity values were observed for the Norton Scale, followed by the Braden Scale and the Waterlow Scale, in that order. We recommended that the above 3 pressure ulcer risk assessment scales continue to be evaluated in the Czech clinical setting.