Literature DB >> 21350270

Pressure ulcers: avoidable or unavoidable? Results of the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel Consensus Conference.

Joyce M Black1, Laura E Edsberg, Mona M Baharestani, Diane Langemo, Margaret Goldberg, Laurie McNichol, Janet Cuddigan.   

Abstract

Although pressure ulcer (PrU) development is now generally considered an indicator for quality of care, questions and concerns about situations in which they are unavoidable remain. Considering the importance of this issue and the lack of available research data, in 2010 the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP) hosted a multidisciplinary conference to establish consensus on whether there are individuals in whom pressure ulcer development may be unavoidable and whether a difference exists between end-of-life skin changes and pressure ulcers. Thirty-four stakeholder organizations from various disciplines were identified and invited to send a voting representative. Of those, 24 accepted the invitation. Before the conference, existing literature was identified and shared via a webinar. A NPUAP task force developed standardized consensus questions for items with none or limited evidence and an interactive protocol was used to develop consensus among conference delegates and attendees. Consensus was established to be 80% agreement among conference delegates. Unanimous consensus was achieved for the following statements: most PrUs are avoidable; not all PrUs are avoidable; there are situations that render PrU development unavoidable, including hemodynamic instability that is worsened with physical movement and inability to maintain nutrition and hydration status and the presence of an advanced directive prohibiting artificial nutrition/hydration; pressure redistribution surfaces cannot replace turning and repositioning; and if enough pressure was removed from the external body the skin cannot always survive. Consensus was not obtained on the practicality or standard of turning patients every 2 hours nor on concerns surrounding the use of medical devices vis-à-vis their potential to cause skin damage. Research is needed to examine these issues, refine preventive practices in challenging situations, and identify the limits of prevention.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21350270

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ostomy Wound Manage        ISSN: 0889-5899            Impact factor:   2.629


  41 in total

Review 1.  Comprehensive management of pressure ulcers in spinal cord injury: current concepts and future trends.

Authors:  Erwin A Kruger; Marilyn Pires; Yvette Ngann; Michelle Sterling; Salah Rubayi
Journal:  J Spinal Cord Med       Date:  2013-05-21       Impact factor: 1.985

2.  Hospital report cards for hospital-acquired pressure ulcers: how good are the grades?

Authors:  Jennifer A Meddings; Heidi Reichert; Tim Hofer; Laurence F McMahon
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2013-10-15       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Phantom testing of the sensitivity and precision of a sub-epidermal moisture scanner.

Authors:  Lea Peko Cohen; Amit Gefen
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2019-04-16       Impact factor: 3.315

4.  International consensus on pressure injury preventative interventions by risk level for critically ill patients: A modified Delphi study.

Authors:  Josephine Lovegrove; Paul Fulbrook; Sandra Miles
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2020-08-16       Impact factor: 3.315

5.  An Evidence-Based Cue-Selection Guide and Logic Model to Improve Pressure Ulcer Prevention in Long-term Care.

Authors:  Tracey L Yap; Susan M Kennerly; Nancy Bergstrom; Sandra L Hudak; Susan D Horn
Journal:  J Nurs Care Qual       Date:  2016 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 1.597

Review 6.  Recent accomplishments in wound healing.

Authors:  Elizabeth J Mudge
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2014-02-21       Impact factor: 3.315

7.  Effects of conventional and alternating cushion weight-shifting in persons with spinal cord injury.

Authors:  Gary A Wu; Kath M Bogie
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  2014

8.  Sensitivity and laboratory performances of a second-generation sub-epidermal moisture measurement device.

Authors:  Lea Peko; Amit Gefen
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2020-03-11       Impact factor: 3.315

Review 9.  Measuring the quality of pressure ulcer prevention: A systematic mapping review of quality indicators.

Authors:  Jan Kottner; Elisabeth Hahnel; Andrea Lichterfeld-Kottner; Ulrike Blume-Peytavi; Andreas Büscher
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2017-11-27       Impact factor: 3.315

Review 10.  Turning frequency in adult bedridden patients to prevent hospital-acquired pressure ulcer: A scoping review.

Authors:  H-S Jocelyn Chew; Emelia Thiara; Violeta Lopez; Shefaly Shorey
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2017-12-15       Impact factor: 3.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.