Literature DB >> 26337859

Predictive Validity of Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment Tools for Elderly: A Meta-Analysis.

Seong-Hi Park1, Young-Shin Lee2, Young-Mi Kwon3.   

Abstract

Preventing pressure ulcers is one of the most challenging goals existing for today's health care provider. Currently used tools which assess risk of pressure ulcer development rarely evaluate the accuracy of predictability, especially in older adults. The current study aimed at providing a systemic review and meta-analysis of 29 studies using three pressure ulcer risk assessment tools: Braden, Norton, and Waterlow Scales. Overall predictive validities of pressure ulcer risks in the pooled sensitivity and specificity indicated a similar range with a moderate accuracy level in all three scales, while heterogeneity showed more than 80% variability among studies. The studies applying the Braden Scale used five different cut-off points representing the primary cause of heterogeneity. Results indicate that commonly used screening tools for pressure ulcer risk have limitations regarding validity and accuracy for use with older adults due to heterogeneity among studies.
© The Author(s) 2015.

Entities:  

Keywords:  heterogeneity; meta-analysis; pressure ulcer; risks; sensitivity; specificity

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26337859     DOI: 10.1177/0193945915602259

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  West J Nurs Res        ISSN: 0193-9459            Impact factor:   1.967


  6 in total

1.  Independent risk factors for pressure ulcer development in a high-risk nursing home population receiving evidence-based pressure ulcer prevention: Results from a study in 26 nursing homes in Belgium.

Authors:  Charlotte Anrys; Hanne Van Tiggelen; Sofie Verhaeghe; Ann Van Hecke; Dimitri Beeckman
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2018-11-09       Impact factor: 3.315

2.  Fecal Transplantation for Treatment of Clostridium Difficile Infection in Elderly and Debilitated Patients.

Authors:  Tali Friedman-Korn; Dan Meir Livovsky; Nitsan Maharshak; Nathaniel Aviv Cohen; Kalman Paz; Ariella Bar-Gil Shitrit; Eran Goldin; Benjamin Koslowsky
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2017-11-13       Impact factor: 3.199

3.  Pressure injury identification, measurement, coding, and reporting: Key challenges and opportunities.

Authors:  Carolina D Weller; Esther R Gershenzon; Sue M Evans; Victoria Team; John J McNeil
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2017-12-21       Impact factor: 3.315

4.  Examining the Concordance in the Documented Pressure Injury Site, Stage, and Count in Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care-III.

Authors:  Wenhui Zhang; Mani Sotoodeh; Joyce C Ho; Roy L Simpson; Vicki S Hertzberg
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2021-09-29       Impact factor: 2.762

5.  A blinded clinical study using a subepidermal moisture biocapacitance measurement device for early detection of pressure injuries.

Authors:  Henry Okonkwo; Ruth Bryant; Jeanette Milne; Donna Molyneaux; Julie Sanders; Glen Cunningham; Sharon Brangman; William Eardley; Garrett K Chan; Barbara Mayer; Mary Waldo; Barbara Ju
Journal:  Wound Repair Regen       Date:  2020-01-21       Impact factor: 3.617

6.  A machine learning algorithm for early detection of heel deep tissue injuries based on a daily history of sub-epidermal moisture measurements.

Authors:  Maayan Lustig; Dafna Schwartz; Ruth Bryant; Amit Gefen
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2022-01-12       Impact factor: 3.099

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.