BACKGROUND: Pressure ulcers are a common problem among hospitalised patients. Several prevalence studies have been conducted internationally but there is a paucity of research on pressure ulcer in the Arab world in general and in Jordan specifically. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to quantify the prevalence rate of pressure ulcers in Jordan, and to compare these figures with other studies conducted using the same methods. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey design. PARTICIPANTS: All inpatients older than eighteen in both university and general hospitals in Jordan. Patients in the emergency, day care and maternity wards were excluded. INSTRUMENTS: European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (EUPAP) data collection form. METHODS: The survey was conducted by examining patients' skin. Pressure ulcers were classified according to the EPUAP grading system. Risk of pressure ulcer development was assessed using the Braden scale. Data were collected on preventive measures recorded in the clinical setting. RESULTS: The overall prevalence rate was 12% (All percentages are rounded to the nearest digit) (7% when Grade I excluded). The sacrum and heel were the most common affected sites. Grade one was the most common grade (44%). Only 17% of the patients at risk received adequate prevention. CONCLUSION: The pressure ulcer prevalence rate in Jordan is lower than that published in most studies utilising the same methodology. Despite this relatively low prevalence very few patients at risk received adequate prevention, and there is therefore a need to raise the awareness for pressure ulcer prevention in Jordan. Furthermore, differences in age and frailty in the Jordanian sample could explain the low prevalence. Copyright Â
BACKGROUND: Pressure ulcers are a common problem among hospitalised patients. Several prevalence studies have been conducted internationally but there is a paucity of research on pressure ulcer in the Arab world in general and in Jordan specifically. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to quantify the prevalence rate of pressure ulcers in Jordan, and to compare these figures with other studies conducted using the same methods. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey design. PARTICIPANTS: All inpatients older than eighteen in both university and general hospitals in Jordan. Patients in the emergency, day care and maternity wards were excluded. INSTRUMENTS: European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (EUPAP) data collection form. METHODS: The survey was conducted by examining patients' skin. Pressure ulcers were classified according to the EPUAP grading system. Risk of pressure ulcer development was assessed using the Braden scale. Data were collected on preventive measures recorded in the clinical setting. RESULTS: The overall prevalence rate was 12% (All percentages are rounded to the nearest digit) (7% when Grade I excluded). The sacrum and heel were the most common affected sites. Grade one was the most common grade (44%). Only 17% of the patients at risk received adequate prevention. CONCLUSION: The pressure ulcer prevalence rate in Jordan is lower than that published in most studies utilising the same methodology. Despite this relatively low prevalence very few patients at risk received adequate prevention, and there is therefore a need to raise the awareness for pressure ulcer prevention in Jordan. Furthermore, differences in age and frailty in the Jordanian sample could explain the low prevalence. Copyright Â
Authors: Inmaculada Lupiañez-Perez; Shakira Kaknani Uttumchandani; Juan Carlos Morilla-Herrera; Francisco Javier Martin-Santos; Magdalena Cuevas Fernandez-Gallego; Francisco Javier Navarro-Moya; Yolanda Lupiañez-Perez; Eugenio Contreras-Fernandez; Jose Miguel Morales-Asencio Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-04-17 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Inmaculada Lupiáñez-Pérez; Juan Carlos Morilla-Herrera; Leovigildo Ginel-Mendoza; Francisco Javier Martín-Santos; Francisco Javier Navarro-Moya; Rafaela Pilar Sepúlveda-Guerra; Rosa Vázquez-Cerdeiros; Magdalena Cuevas-Fernández-Gallego; Isabel María Benítez-Serrano; Yolanda Lupiáñez-Pérez; José Miguel Morales-Asencio Journal: Trials Date: 2013-10-23 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Peter A Lazzarini; Sheree E Hurn; Malindu E Fernando; Scott D Jen; Suzanne S Kuys; Maarten C Kamp; Lloyd F Reed Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2015-11-23 Impact factor: 2.692