Tom Defloor

Impact of Pressure Ulcers on Quality of Life in Older Patients: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES: To identify the impact of pressure ulcers (PUs) and PU interventions on health‐related quality of life (HRQL).

Patient risk factors for pressure ulcer development: Systematic review

OBJECTIVE To identify risk factors independently predictive of pressure ulcer development in adult patient populations? DESIGN A systematic review of primary research was undertaken, based upon methods recommended for effectiveness questions but adapted to identify observational risk factor studies. DATA SOURCES Fourteen electronic databases were searched, each from inception until March 2010, with hand searching of specialist journals and conference proceedings; contact with experts and a citation search. There was no language restriction. REVIEW METHODS Abstracts were screened, reviewed against the eligibility criteria, data extracted and quality appraised by at least one reviewer and checked by a second. Where necessary, statistical review was undertaken. We developed an assessment framework and quality classification based upon guidelines for assessing quality and methodological considerations in the analysis, meta-analysis and publication of observational studies. Studies were classified as high, moderate, low and very low quality. Risk factors were categorised into risk factor domains and sub-domains. Evidence tables were generated and a summary narrative synthesis by sub-domain and domain was undertaken. RESULTS Of 5462 abstracts retrieved, 365 were identified as potentially eligible and 54 fulfilled the eligibility criteria. The 54 studies included 34,449 patients and acute and community patient populations. Seventeen studies were classified as high or moderate quality, whilst 37 studies (68.5%) had inadequate numbers of pressure ulcers and other methodological limitations. Risk factors emerging most frequently as independent predictors of pressure ulcer development included three primary domains of mobility/activity, perfusion (including diabetes) and skin/pressure ulcer status. Skin moisture, age, haematological measures, nutrition and general health status are also important, but did not emerge as frequently as the three main domains. Body temperature and immunity may be important but require further confirmatory research. There is limited evidence that either race or gender is important. CONCLUSIONS Overall there is no single factor which can explain pressure ulcer risk, rather a complex interplay of factors which increase the probability of pressure ulcer development. The review highlights the limitations of over-interpretation of results from individual studies and the benefits of reviewing results from a number of studies to develop a more reliable overall assessment of factors which are important in affecting patient susceptibility.

The effect of position and mattress on interface pressure.

The aim of this investigation was to determine which positions resulted in the lowest pressures to the skin of persons lying in bed. Pressures were recorded in 10 different lying positions on 2 mattresses in 62 healthy volunteers. The study revealed that the 30 degrees semi-Fowler position and the prone position resulted in the lowest interface pressures. The 30 degrees laterally inclined position had lower pressure readings than the 90 degrees side lying position; 90 degrees side lying position gives the highest pressure readings and thus should be avoided. A Tempur polyethylene-urethane mattress reduces interface pressures by 20 to 30% in comparison to a standard hospital mattress (12-cm-thick cold foam).

Prevention and treatment of incontinence-associated dermatitis: literature review.

AIM This paper is a report of a review conducted to describe the current evidence about the prevention and treatment of incontinence-associated dermatitis and to formulate recommendations for clinical practice and research. BACKGROUND Incontinence-associated dermatitis is a common problem in patients with incontinence. It is a daily challenge for healthcare professionals to maintain a healthy skin in patients with incontinence. DATA SOURCES PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, reference lists and conference proceedings were explored up to September 2008. REVIEW METHODS Publications were included if they reported research on the prevention and treatment of incontinence-associated dermatitis. As little consensus about terminology was found, a very sensitive filter was developed. Study design was not used as a selection criterion due to the explorative character of the review and the scarce literature. RESULTS Thirty-six publications, dealing with 25 different studies, were included. The implementation of a structured perineal skin care programme including skin cleansing and the use of a moisturizer is suggested. A skin protectant is recommended for patients considered at risk of incontinence-associated dermatitis development. Perineal skin cleansers are preferable to using water and soap. Skin care is suggested after each incontinence episode, particularly if faeces are present. The quality of methods in the included studies was low. CONCLUSIONS Incontinence-associated dermatitis can be prevented and healed with timely and appropriate skin cleansing and skin protection. Prevention and treatment should also focus on a proper use of incontinence containment materials. Further research is required to evaluate the efficacy and effectiveness of various interventions.

Incidence and risk factors for pressure ulcers in the intensive care unit.

AIMS To determine the incidence of pressure ulcers occurring at least 48 hours after admission and risk factors for pressure ulcers grade 2-4 in a long-stay surgical Intensive Care Unit (ICU) population. BACKGROUND The incidence of pressure ulcers in intensive care units is larger than in non-intensive environments. DESIGN Prospective descriptive research design. METHODS Using pressure ulcers grade 2-4 as an outcome measure, a multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify the risk factors. Data were obtained on a daily basis in a surgical intensive care unit of the University Hospital Leuven between November 2003-March 2004. A total of 520 long-stay (>or= 24 hours) intensive care patients were included. RESULTS Cumulative incidence of pressure ulcers grade 2-4 was 20.1%. The following variables were positively associated with pressure ulcers grade 2-4: history of vascular disease, treatment with Dopamine or Dobutamine, intermittent haemodialysis (IHD) or continuous veno-venous haemofiltration (CVVH), mechanical ventilation. Also preventive measures were statistically positively associated with pressure ulcers grade 2-4: turning, floating heels, alternating mattresses, adequate prevention. The use of sedatives, body temperature above 38.5 degrees C and sitting in chair where negatively associated with pressure ulcers. Pressure ulcers are statistically associated with different risk factors and preventive measures. CONCLUSION The identified risk factors are eligible to be included in a new risk assessment scale for patients admitted to intensive care units. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE The novel insights have implications for risk assessment for patients in intensive care units. Patients admitted to intensive care units have other risk factors for pressure ulcers which are eligible to be included in a new risk assessment scale.

Malnutrition and associated factors in elderly hospital patients: a Belgian cross-sectional, multi-centre study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS In Belgium, general data on the prevalence of malnutrition are lacking. Prevalence rates are necessary to gain insight into the magnitude of malnutrition and to establish a nutrition policy that takes the limited health care resources into account. This study aimed to obtain insight into the prevalence of malnutrition in Belgian elderly hospital wards and to identify factors associated with the malnutrition prevalence. METHODS A cross-sectional, multi-centre study in elderly wards of Belgian hospitals. The nutritional status was assessed using the Mini Nutritional Assessment. A standardised questionnaire was used to record demographic data and data on potential factors associated with malnutrition. RESULTS Out of 2329 elderly patients, 33% suffered from malnutrition. Almost 43% of the patients were at risk of malnutrition and 24% were well-nourished. Having swallowing difficulties, taste difficulties, and being transferred from a nursing home were strongly associated with being malnourished. CONCLUSION The malnutrition prevalence in Belgian elderly hospitals wards is similar to international figures. Elderly who have swallowing difficulties, taste difficulties, or coming from a nursing home may need adequate nutritional care. Given the negative impact of malnutrition on mortality and morbidity, an emphasis should be placed on an effective nutritional policy.

Statement of the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel —pressure ulcer classification: differentiation between pressure ulcers and moisture lesions

Apressure ulcer is an area of localized damage to the skin and underlying tissue caused by pressure or shear and/or a combination of these. The identification of pressure damage is an essential and integral part of clinical practice and pressure ulcer research. Pressure ulcer classification is a method of determining the severity of a pressure ulcer and is also used to distinguish pressure ulcers from other skin lesions. A classification system describes a series of numbered grades or stages, each determining a different degree of tissue damage. The European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (EPUAP) defined 4 different pressure ulcer grades (Table 1).1 Nonblanchable erythema is a sign that pressure and shear are causing tissue damage and that preventive measures should be taken without delay to prevent the development of pressure ulcer lesions (Grade 2, 3, or 4). The diagnosis of the existence of a pressure ulcer is more difficult than one commonly assumes. There is often confusion between a pressure ulcer and a lesion that is caused by the presence of moisture, for example, because of incontinence of urine and/or feces. Differentiation between the two is clinically important, because prevention and treatment strategies differ largely and the consequences of the outcome for the patient are imminently important. This statement on pressure ulcer classification is limitedto the differentiation between pressure ulcers and moisture lesions. Obviously, there are numerous other lesions that might be misclassified as a pressure ulcer (eg, leg ulcer and diabetic foot). Experience has shown that becauseof their location, moisture lesions are the ones most often misclassified as pressure ulcers.2-3 Wound-related characteristics (causes, location, shape, depth, edges, and color), along with patient-related characteristics, are helpful to differentiate between a pressure ulcer and a moisture lesion

Knowledge and Attitudes of Nurses on Pressure Ulcer Prevention: A Cross‐Sectional Multicenter Study in Belgian Hospitals

BACKGROUND Evidence-based guidelines for pressure ulcer prevention have been developed and promoted by authoritative organizations. However, nonadherence to these guidelines is frequently reported. Negative attitudes and lack of knowledge may act as barriers to using guidelines in clinical practice. AIMS To study the knowledge and attitudes of nurses about pressure ulcer prevention in Belgian hospitals and to explore the correlation between knowledge, attitudes, and the application of adequate prevention. METHODS A cross-sectional multicenter study was performed in a random sample of 14 Belgian hospitals, representing 207 wards. Out of that group, 94 wards were randomly selected (2105 patients). Clinical observations were performed to assess the adequacy of pressure ulcer prevention and pressure ulcer prevalence. From each participating ward, a random selection of at least five nurses completed an extensively validated knowledge and attitude instrument. In total, 553 nurses participated. A logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the correlation between knowledge, attitudes, and the application of adequate prevention. RESULTS Pressure ulcer prevalence (Category I-IV) was 13.5% (284/2105). Approximately 30% (625/2105) of the patients were at risk (Bradenscore <17 and/or presence of pressure ulcer). Only 13.9% (87/625) of these patients received fully adequate prevention whilst in bed and when seated. The mean knowledge and attitude scores were 49.7% and 71.3%, respectively. The application of adequate prevention on a nursing ward was significantly correlated with the attitudes of the nurses (OR = 3.07, p = .05). No independent correlation was found between knowledge and the application of adequate prevention (OR = 0.75, p = .71). CONCLUSIONS Knowledge of nurses in Belgian hospitals about the prevention of pressure ulcers is inadequate. The attitudes of nurses toward pressure ulcers are significantly correlated with the application of adequate prevention. No correlation was found between knowledge and the application of adequate prevention.

Assessing the adequacy of pressure ulcer prevention in hospitals: a nationwide prevalence survey

Introduction The development of a pressure ulcer is an adverse event and is often avoidable if adequate preventive measures are applied. No large-scale data, based on direct patient observations, are available regarding the pressure ulcer preventive interventions used in hospitals. Purpose The aim of this study was to obtain insight into the adequacy of interventions used to prevent pressure ulcers in Belgian hospitals. Methods A cross-sectional, multi-centre pressure ulcer prevalence study was performed in Belgian hospitals. The methodology used to measure pressure ulcer prevalence was developed by the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel. The data collection instrument includes five categories of data: general data, patient data, risk assessment, skin observation and prevention. Results The total sample consisted of 19 968 patients. The overall prevalence of pressure ulcers Category I–IV was 12.1%. Only 10.8% of the patients at risk received fully adequate prevention in bed and while sitting. More than 70% of the patients not at risk received some pressure ulcer prevention while lying or sitting. Concusion Generally, there is a limited use of adequate preventive interventions for pressure ulcers in hospitals, which reflects a rather low quality of preventive care. The implementation of pressure ulcer guidelines requires more attention. The pressure ulcer prevention used in practice should be re-evaluated on a regular basis.

Dilemmas in measuring and using pressure ulcer prevalence and incidence: an international consensus

Pressure ulcer prevalence and incidence data are increasingly being used as indicators of quality of care and the efficacy of pressure ulcer prevention protocols. In some health care systems, the occurrence of pressure ulcers is also being linked to reimbursement. The wider use of these epidemiological analyses necessitates that all those involved in pressure ulcer care and prevention have a clear understanding of the definitions and implications of prevalence and incidence rates. In addition, an appreciation of the potential difficulties in conducting prevalence and incidence studies and the possible explanations for differences between studies are important. An international group of experts has worked to produce a consensus document that aims to delineate and discuss the important issues involved, and to provide guidance on approaches to conducting and interpreting pressure ulcer prevalence and incidence studies. The groups main findings are summarised in this paper.