OBJECTIVE: To identify how current pressure ulcer staging systems and experts describe pressure-related deep tissue injury under intact skin in the published research literature. DESIGN: A systematic review of published English-language literature as of November 2002 with the words decubitus or pressure ulcer(s) in the title. Additional relevant articles were identified by National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel members and were included in the analysis. An expert commentary was developed by iterative review by the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel members. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Manuscripts were reviewed for staging systems cited or described, definitions of Stage I pressure ulcers, and descriptions or definitions of pressure-related deep tissue injury under intact skin. MAIN RESULTS: Ninety-four relevant articles were identified. Seventy-three articles (78%) described a staging system, and 55 of 73 (75%) cited the staging definitions from Shea, the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, or the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. The National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel's staging definitions were the most frequently cited overall. Twenty-three articles (25%) included some discussion that could be interpreted as relevant to the topic of pressure-related deep tissue injury under intact skin; however, no consistency in definitions of Stage I pressure ulcers or terminology for pressure-related deep tissue injury under intact skin was found. CONCLUSIONS: Several pressure ulcer staging systems are frequently cited, but none define pressure-related deep tissue injury under intact skin. The National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel recommends using the terms "pressure-related deep tissue injury under intact skin" or "deep tissue injury under intact skin" for describing these lesions and encourages investigators to establish the epidemiology and natural history of these lesions.
OBJECTIVE: To identify how current pressure ulcer staging systems and experts describe pressure-related deep tissue injury under intact skin in the published research literature. DESIGN: A systematic review of published English-language literature as of November 2002 with the words decubitus or pressure ulcer(s) in the title. Additional relevant articles were identified by National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel members and were included in the analysis. An expert commentary was developed by iterative review by the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel members. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Manuscripts were reviewed for staging systems cited or described, definitions of Stage I pressure ulcers, and descriptions or definitions of pressure-related deep tissue injury under intact skin. MAIN RESULTS: Ninety-four relevant articles were identified. Seventy-three articles (78%) described a staging system, and 55 of 73 (75%) cited the staging definitions from Shea, the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, or the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. The National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel's staging definitions were the most frequently cited overall. Twenty-three articles (25%) included some discussion that could be interpreted as relevant to the topic of pressure-related deep tissue injury under intact skin; however, no consistency in definitions of Stage I pressure ulcers or terminology for pressure-related deep tissue injury under intact skin was found. CONCLUSIONS: Several pressure ulcer staging systems are frequently cited, but none define pressure-related deep tissue injury under intact skin. The National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel recommends using the terms "pressure-related deep tissue injury under intact skin" or "deep tissue injury under intact skin" for describing these lesions and encourages investigators to establish the epidemiology and natural history of these lesions.
Authors: Dohyung Lim; Fang Lin; Ronald W Hendrix; Brian Moran; Charles Fasanati; Mohsen Makhsous Journal: Med Biol Eng Comput Date: 2007-10-06 Impact factor: 2.602
Authors: Yih-Kuen Jan; Barbara A Crane; Fuyuan Liao; Jeffrey A Woods; William J Ennis Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2013-04-18 Impact factor: 3.966