Literature DB >> 27668477

A Meta-analysis to Evaluate the Predictive Validity of the Braden Scale for Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment in Long-term Care.

Hong-Lin Chen1, Wang-Qin Shen1, Peng Liu1.   

Abstract

Although it is among the most commonly used pressure ulcer risk assessment tools, the Braden Scale may lack strong predictive validity when used in the long-term care setting. A meta-analysis was conducted of English-language articles published in the PubMed database and Web of Science from the indices' inception through July 2015 to assess the predictive validity of the Braden Scale for pressure ulcers in long-term care residents. Search terms included pressure ulcer, pressure sore, bedsore, decubitus, long-term care, nursing home, skilled nursing facility, hospice, and Braden. Data extracted from the publications included sample and setting characteristics and predictive value indices. The pooled sensitivities, specificities, diagnostic odds ratios (DOR), and constructed summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves were calculated. Eight studies (2 prospective cohorts and 6 cross-sectional studies) with 41 489 residents met selection criteria for inclusion in the analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.80 (95% CI: 0.79-0.81) and 0.42 (95% CI: 0.42-0.43), respectively, yielding a combined DOR of 5.66 (95% CI: 3.77-8.48). The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.7686 ± 0.0478 (95% CI: 0.6749-0.8623), and the overall diagnostic accuracy (Q*) was 0.7090 ± 0.0402 (95% CI: 0.6302-0.7878). Significant heterogeneity was noted among the included studies; Q value was 302.54 (P = 0.000), and I2 for pooled sensitivity, pooled specificity, and pooled DOR was 97.4%, 98.7% and 96.4%, respectively. Meta-regression analysis showed no heterogeneity was noted among Braden scale cut-offs (P = 0.123) and pressure ulcer prevalence P = 0.547). The evidence showed the Braden Scale has moderate predictive validity and low predictive specificity for pressure ulcers in long-term care residents. The development and testing of new risk assessment scales for this population is warranted.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27668477

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


  4 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.  Machine Learning Approaches for Hospital Acquired Pressure Injuries: A Retrospective Study of Electronic Medical Records.

Authors:  Joshua J Levy; Jorge F Lima; Megan W Miller; Gary L Freed; A James O'Malley; Rebecca T Emeny
Journal:  Front Med Technol       Date:  2022-06-16

3.  Consistent practices in pressure ulcer prevention based on international care guidelines: A cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Elina Haavisto; Minna Stolt; Pauli Puukka; Teija Korhonen; Emilia Kielo-Viljamaa
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2021-11-10       Impact factor: 3.099

4.  Distinct Skin Microbiome and Skin Physiological Functions Between Bedridden Older Patients and Healthy People: A Single-Center Study in Japan.

Authors:  Satoshi Nagase; Kazuhiro Ogai; Tamae Urai; Kana Shibata; Emi Matsubara; Kanae Mukai; Miki Matsue; Yumiko Mori; Miku Aoki; Defa Arisandi; Junko Sugama; Shigefumi Okamoto
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2020-04-08
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.