Literature DB >> 21134037

Development and validation of a pressure ulcer risk assessment tool for acute hospital patients.

Karen Nicola Page1, Anna Lucia Barker, Jeannette Kamar.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to develop and validate a pressure ulcer risk assessment for acute hospitals. This tool was developed in a cohort of 342 patients with a mean age 63 years (SD 19.82) and validated in a second cohort of 165 patients with a mean age 68 years (SD 18.40). Risk factors for inclusion on The Northern Hospital Pressure Ulcer Prevention Plan (TNH-PUPP) were identified from the literature then examined and weighted using logistic regression. Risk factors included on the TNH-PUPP were requires assistance to move in bed (odds ratio [OR] 5.15; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.49-10.65), admission to intensive care during current admission (OR 2.98; 95% CI: 1.33-6.67), aged ≥ 65 years (OR 2.81; 95% CI: 1.24-6.36), reduced sensation (OR 2.29; 95% CI: 1.19-4.42), and cognitive impairment (OR 2.26; 95% CI: 1.09-4.67). The TNH-PUPP was validated in a prospective sample. The new tool had high diagnostic validity (area under the receiver operating curve=0.86), consistent in the validation sample (area under the receiver operating curve=0.90). The TNH-PUPP has a moderate positive predictive value (development=0.50; validation=0.13), and a high negative predictive value (development=0.94; validation=0.99) enabling low-risk patients to be screened out, as noncandidates for pressure ulcer prevention interventions. An accurate pressure ulcer risk assessment has been developed and validated, which identifies a high-risk group to whom limited pressure ulcer prevention resources should be directed. The TNH-PUPP facilitates effective resource allocation and is likely to reduce unnecessary patient harm and costs from pressure ulcers in acute hospitals.
© 2010 by the Wound Healing Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21134037     DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-475X.2010.00647.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Wound Repair Regen        ISSN: 1067-1927            Impact factor:   3.617


  6 in total

1.  Implementation of pressure ulcer prevention best practice recommendations in acute care: an observational study.

Authors:  Anna Lucia Barker; Jeannette Kamar; Tamara Jane Tyndall; Lyn White; Anastasia Hutchinson; Nicole Klopfer; Carolina Weller
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2012-04-19       Impact factor: 3.315

2.  Developing a pressure ulcer risk factor minimum data set and risk assessment framework.

Authors:  Susanne Coleman; E Andrea Nelson; Justin Keen; Lyn Wilson; Elizabeth McGinnis; Carol Dealey; Nikki Stubbs; Delia Muir; Amanda Farrin; Dawn Dowding; Jos M G A Schols; Janet Cuddigan; Dan Berlowitz; Edward Jude; Peter Vowden; Dan L Bader; Amit Gefen; Cees W J Oomens; Lisette Schoonhoven; Jane Nixon
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  2014-05-21       Impact factor: 3.187

3.  Using cognitive pre-testing methods in the development of a new evidenced-based pressure ulcer risk assessment instrument.

Authors:  S Coleman; J Nixon; J Keen; D Muir; L Wilson; E McGinnis; N Stubbs; C Dealey; E A Nelson
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2016-11-16       Impact factor: 4.615

4.  Clinical evaluation of a new pressure ulcer risk assessment instrument, the Pressure Ulcer Risk Primary or Secondary Evaluation Tool (PURPOSE T).

Authors:  Susanne Coleman; Isabelle L Smith; Elizabeth McGinnis; Justin Keen; Delia Muir; Lyn Wilson; Nikki Stubbs; Carol Dealey; Sarah Brown; E Andrea Nelson; Jane Nixon
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  2017-09-28       Impact factor: 3.187

Review 5.  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

6.  Evaluation of the effectiveness of a comprehensive care plan to reduce hospital acquired complications in an Australian hospital: protocol for a mixed-method preimplementation and postimplementation study.

Authors:  Rebecca Leigh Jessup; Mark Tacey; Maree Glynn; Michael Kirk; Liz McKeown
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-07-20       Impact factor: 2.692

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.