PURPOSE: The aim of this descriptive study was to describe the level of preventive care provided to intensive care unit (ICU) patients at risk for development of pressure ulcers (PU). SETTING AND SUBJECTS: Our study population comprised 126 nurses working at coronary ICU, cardiovascular surgery ICU, or a gastroenterology ICU of State Hospital in the Republic of Turkey. The study sample consisted of 30 nurses selected from these units using a layered sampling method. INSTRUMENTS: Data were collected using the following 4 forms: (1) ICU evaluation form, (2) demographic questionnaire form, (3) Braden Scale, and (4) observation form. The observation form was developed by the investigator to record PU prevention interventions made by the study nurses. METHODS: Nurses were observed while giving care to patients at risk according to Braden Scale scores and each action of the nurses to prevent PU was recorded. Data were collected until 90 observations (3 observations with each of 30 nurses) were completed. RESULTS: Nurses did not consistently engage in interventions recommended for prevention of PU. Subjects did not consistently use the risk-evaluation scale, document position changes on the appropriate form, and train auxiliary personnel about PU prevention. The most frequently fulfilled behaviors for PU prevention were avoiding hot water when cleansing the skin, helping the patient eat, avoiding placing the patient directly on a trochanter, refraining from using improper support material, and use of pressure-redistribution surfaces. The least fulfilled behaviors were (1) application of a skin barrier or protectant on moist skin and (2) application of a moisturizer to dry or compromised skin, protecting the skin during patient transfer, repositioning, and documenting prevention interventions. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that critical care nurses do not consistently provide preventive care for PU.
PURPOSE: The aim of this descriptive study was to describe the level of preventive care provided to intensive care unit (ICU) patients at risk for development of pressure ulcers (PU). SETTING AND SUBJECTS: Our study population comprised 126 nurses working at coronary ICU, cardiovascular surgery ICU, or a gastroenterology ICU of State Hospital in the Republic of Turkey. The study sample consisted of 30 nurses selected from these units using a layered sampling method. INSTRUMENTS: Data were collected using the following 4 forms: (1) ICU evaluation form, (2) demographic questionnaire form, (3) Braden Scale, and (4) observation form. The observation form was developed by the investigator to record PU prevention interventions made by the study nurses. METHODS: Nurses were observed while giving care to patients at risk according to Braden Scale scores and each action of the nurses to prevent PU was recorded. Data were collected until 90 observations (3 observations with each of 30 nurses) were completed. RESULTS: Nurses did not consistently engage in interventions recommended for prevention of PU. Subjects did not consistently use the risk-evaluation scale, document position changes on the appropriate form, and train auxiliary personnel about PU prevention. The most frequently fulfilled behaviors for PU prevention were avoiding hot water when cleansing the skin, helping the patient eat, avoiding placing the patient directly on a trochanter, refraining from using improper support material, and use of pressure-redistribution surfaces. The least fulfilled behaviors were (1) application of a skin barrier or protectant on moist skin and (2) application of a moisturizer to dry or compromised skin, protecting the skin during patient transfer, repositioning, and documenting prevention interventions. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that critical care nurses do not consistently provide preventive care for PU.
Authors: Francisco Manzano; Manuel Colmenero; Ana María Pérez-Pérez; Delphine Roldán; María del Mar Jiménez-Quintana; María Reyes Mañas; María Angustias Sánchez-Moya; Carmen Guerrero; María Ángeles Moral-Marfil; Emilio Sánchez-Cantalejo; Enrique Fernández-Mondéjar Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2014-09-05 Impact factor: 17.440