Literature DB >> 15788914

Predicting pressure ulcer risk: comparing the predictive validity of 4 scales.

Rostam Jalali1, Mansour Rezaie.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the predictive validity of 4 pressure ulcer risk assessment tools.
METHODS: Prospective clinical design in which 230 subjects free of pressure ulceration on admission were assessed using the Braden, Gosnell, Norton, and Waterlow scales within 48 hours of admission. Subjects' skin condition was assessed once every 24 hours for a minimum of 14 days to identify any skin breakdown.
RESULTS: Based on Youden's index, the Gosnell Scale had better predictive validity in identifying patients at risk for pressure ulcer development (J = 68%). The other scales did not predict individuals at risk with high accuracy, despite having high sensitivity and specificity.
CONCLUSION: Numerous pressure ulcer risk assessment tools have been developed, but sufficient evidence for using one tool over another does not exist. In this study, the Gosnell Scale was found to be more appropriate for application in patients with neurologic and orthopedic conditions. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Being able to predict which patients are at risk for pressure ulcers can assist practitioners in tailoring care to prevent unnecessary complications and suffering, as well as reduce costs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15788914     DOI: 10.1097/00129334-200503000-00013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Adv Skin Wound Care        ISSN: 1527-7941            Impact factor:   2.347


  5 in total

Review 1.  Repositioning for pressure ulcer prevention in adults.

Authors:  Brigid M Gillespie; Wendy P Chaboyer; Elizabeth McInnes; Bridie Kent; Jennifer A Whitty; Lukman Thalib
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2014-04-03

Review 2.  Evaluation of the Validity and Reliability of the Waterlow Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment Scale.

Authors:  Charalambos Charalambous; Agoritsa Koulori; Aristidis Vasilopoulos; Zoe Roupa
Journal:  Med Arch       Date:  2018-04

3.  Repositioning for pressure injury prevention in adults.

Authors:  Brigid M Gillespie; Rachel M Walker; Sharon L Latimer; Lukman Thalib; Jennifer A Whitty; Elizabeth McInnes; Wendy P Chaboyer
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-06-02

Review 4.  Assessing Predictive Validity of Pressure Ulcer Risk Scales- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Seong-Hi Park; Hea Shoon Lee
Journal:  Iran J Public Health       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 1.429

5.  Effect of Varying Repositioning Frequency on Pressure Injury Prevention in Nursing Home Residents: TEAM-UP Trial Results.

Authors:  Tracey L Yap; Susan D Horn; Phoebe D Sharkey; Tianyu Zheng; Nancy Bergstrom; Cathleen Colon-Emeric; Valerie K Sabol; Jenny Alderden; Winston Yap; Susan M Kennerly
Journal:  Adv Skin Wound Care       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 2.373

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.