AIMS: The purpose of this study was: (1) to determine the combination of risk factors which best predicts the risk of developing pressure ulcers among inpatients in an acute care university hospital; (2) to determine the appropriate weight for each risk factor; and (3) to derive a concise and easy-to-use risk assessment tool for daily use by nursing staff. BACKGROUND: Efficient application of preventive measures against pressure ulcers requires the identification of patients at risk. Adequate risk assessment tools are still needed because the predictive value of existing tools is sometimes unsatisfactory. DESIGN: Survey. METHODS: A sample of 34,238 cases admitted to Essen University Clinics from April 2003 and discharged up to and including March 2004, was enrolled into the study. Nursing staff recorded data on pressure ulcer status and potential risk factors on admission. Predictors were identified and weighted by multivariate logistic regression. We derived a risk assessment scale from the final logistic regression model by assigning point values to each predictor according to its individual weight. RESULTS: The period prevalence rate of pressure ulcers was 1.8% (625 cases). The analysis identified 12 predictors for developing pressure ulcers. With the optimum cut-off point sensitivity and specificity were 83.4 and 83.1%, respectively, with a positive predictive value of 8.4% and a negative predictive value of 99.6%. The diagnostic probabilities of the derived scale were similar to those of the original regression model. CONCLUSIONS: The predictors mostly correspond to those used in established scales, although the use of weighted factors is a partly novel approach. Both the final regression model and the derived scale show good prognostic validity. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The derived risk assessment scale is an easy-to-understand, easy-to-use tool with good prognostic validity and can assist in effective application of preventive measures against pressure ulcer.
AIMS: The purpose of this study was: (1) to determine the combination of risk factors which best predicts the risk of developing pressure ulcers among inpatients in an acute care university hospital; (2) to determine the appropriate weight for each risk factor; and (3) to derive a concise and easy-to-use risk assessment tool for daily use by nursing staff. BACKGROUND: Efficient application of preventive measures against pressure ulcers requires the identification of patients at risk. Adequate risk assessment tools are still needed because the predictive value of existing tools is sometimes unsatisfactory. DESIGN: Survey. METHODS: A sample of 34,238 cases admitted to Essen University Clinics from April 2003 and discharged up to and including March 2004, was enrolled into the study. Nursing staff recorded data on pressure ulcer status and potential risk factors on admission. Predictors were identified and weighted by multivariate logistic regression. We derived a risk assessment scale from the final logistic regression model by assigning point values to each predictor according to its individual weight. RESULTS: The period prevalence rate of pressure ulcers was 1.8% (625 cases). The analysis identified 12 predictors for developing pressure ulcers. With the optimum cut-off point sensitivity and specificity were 83.4 and 83.1%, respectively, with a positive predictive value of 8.4% and a negative predictive value of 99.6%. The diagnostic probabilities of the derived scale were similar to those of the original regression model. CONCLUSIONS: The predictors mostly correspond to those used in established scales, although the use of weighted factors is a partly novel approach. Both the final regression model and the derived scale show good prognostic validity. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The derived risk assessment scale is an easy-to-understand, easy-to-use tool with good prognostic validity and can assist in effective application of preventive measures against pressure ulcer.
Authors: Konstantinos Tsaras; Maria Chatzi; Christos F Kleisiaris; Evangelos C Fradelos; Lambrini Kourkouta; Ioanna V Papathanasiou Journal: Med Arch Date: 2016-10-25