Literature DB >> 28494507

Subepidermal moisture detection of pressure induced tissue damage on the trunk: The pressure ulcer detection study outcomes.

Barbara M Bates-Jensen1,2, Heather E McCreath2, Anabel Patlan1,2.   

Abstract

We examined the relationship between subepidermal moisture measured using surface electrical capacitance and visual skin assessment of pressure ulcers at the trunk location (sacral, ischial tuberosities) in 417 nursing home residents residing in 19 facilities. Participants were on average older (mean age of 77 years), 58% were female, over half were ethnic minorities (29% African American, 12% Asian American, and 21% Hispanic), and at risk for pressure ulcers (mean score for Braden Scale for Predicting Pressure Ulcer Risk of 15.6). Concurrent visual assessments and subepidermal moisture were obtained at the sacrum and right and left ischium weekly for 16 weeks. Visual assessment was categorized as normal, erythema, stage 1 pressure ulcer, Deep Tissue Injury or stage 2+ pressure ulcer using the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel 2009 classification system. Incidence of any skin damage was 52%. Subepidermal moisture was measured with a dermal phase meter where higher readings indicate greater moisture (range: 0-70 tissue dielectric constant), with values increasing significantly with the presence of skin damage. Elevated subepidermal moisture values co-occurred with concurrent skin damage in generalized multinomial logistic models (to control for repeated observations) at the sacrum, adjusting for age and risk. Higher subepidermal moisture values were associated with visual damage 1 week later using similar models. Threshold values for subepidermal moisture were compared to visual ratings to predict skin damage 1 week later. Subepidermal moisture of 39 tissue dielectric constant units predicted 41% of future skin damage while visual ratings predicted 27%. Thus, this method of detecting early skin damage holds promise for clinicians, especially as it is objective and equally valid for all groups of patients.
© 2017 by the Wound Healing Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28494507      PMCID: PMC5568916          DOI: 10.1111/wrr.12548

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


  52 in total

1.  Quality improvement implementation in the nursing home.

Authors:  Dan R Berlowitz; Gary J Young; Elaine C Hickey; Debra Saliba; Brian S Mittman; Elaine Czarnowski; Barbara Simon; Jennifer J Anderson; Arlene S Ash; Lisa V Rubenstein; Mark A Moskowitz
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 2.  Comprehensive programs for preventing pressure ulcers: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Andrea Niederhauser; Carol VanDeusen Lukas; Victoria Parker; Elizabeth A Ayello; Karen Zulkowski; Dan Berlowitz
Journal:  Adv Skin Wound Care       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 2.347

3.  Using binary logistic regression models for ordinal data with non-proportional odds.

Authors:  R Bender; U Grouven
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 6.437

4.  Skin tissue water assessed via tissue dielectric constant measurements in persons with and without diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Harvey N Mayrovitz; Aldene McClymont; Naushira Pandya
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2012-11-12       Impact factor: 6.118

5.  Bates-Jensen wound assessment tool: pictorial guide validation project.

Authors:  Connie Harris; Barbara Bates-Jensen; Nancy Parslow; Rose Raizman; Mina Singh; Robert Ketchen
Journal:  J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs       Date:  2010 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.741

6.  Internal medicine interns' and residents' pressure ulcer prevention and assessment attitudes and abilities: results of an exploratory study .

Authors:  Winnie Suen; Victoria A Parker; Lauren Harney; Siobhan Nevin; Jane Jansen; Linda Alexander; Dan Berlowitz
Journal:  Ostomy Wound Manage       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 2.629

7.  Results of the 2008-2009 International Pressure Ulcer Prevalence Survey and a 3-year, acute care, unit-specific analysis.

Authors:  Catherine VanGilder; Stephanie Amlung; Patrick Harrison; Stephanie Meyer
Journal:  Ostomy Wound Manage       Date:  2009-11-01       Impact factor: 2.629

8.  Black/White differences in pressure ulcer incidence in nursing home residents.

Authors:  Mona Baumgarten; David Margolis; Carol van Doorn; Ann L Gruber-Baldini; J Richard Hebel; Sheryl Zimmerman; Jay Magaziner
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 5.562

9.  Validation of a new dielectric device to assess changes of tissue water in skin and subcutaneous fat.

Authors:  J Nuutinen; R Ikäheimo; T Lahtinen
Journal:  Physiol Meas       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 2.833

10.  Use of Munsell color charts to measure skin tone objectively in nursing home residents at risk for pressure ulcer development.

Authors:  Heather E McCreath; Barbara M Bates-Jensen; Gojiro Nakagami; Anabel Patlan; Howard Booth; Dana Connolly; Cyndi Truong; Agazi Woldai
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  2016-04-08       Impact factor: 3.187

View more
  8 in total

1.  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

2.  Subepidermal moisture detection of heel pressure injury: The pressure ulcer detection study outcomes.

Authors:  Barbara M Bates-Jensen; Heather E McCreath; Gojiro Nakagami; Anabel Patlan
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2017-12-17       Impact factor: 3.315

3.  Sub-epidermal moisture measurement: an evidence-based approach to the assessment for early evidence of pressure ulcer presence.

Authors:  Aglecia Moda Vitoriano Budri; Zena Moore; Declan Patton; Tom O'Connor; Linda Nugent; Pinar Avsar
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2020-07-19       Impact factor: 3.315

4.  Reliability of the Bates-Jensen wound assessment tool for pressure injury assessment: The pressure ulcer detection study.

Authors:  Barbara M Bates-Jensen; Heather E McCreath; Deniz Harputlu; Anabel Patlan
Journal:  Wound Repair Regen       Date:  2019-03-18       Impact factor: 3.617

5.  Utility of a sensor-based technology to assist in the prevention of pressure ulcers: A clinical comparison.

Authors:  Rose Raizman; Minette MacNeil; Laurie Rappl
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2018-08-30       Impact factor: 3.315

6.  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

7.  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

8.  Our contemporary understanding of the aetiology of pressure ulcers/pressure injuries.

Authors:  Amit Gefen; David M Brienza; Janet Cuddigan; Emily Haesler; Jan Kottner
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2021-08-11       Impact factor: 3.315

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.