Jan Powers1, Rebecca Beaubien2, Tressa Brunner3, Kellie Girardot4, Jennifer Rechter5, Janette Richardson6. 1. Parkview Health System, 11109 Parkview Plaza Drive, Fort Wayne, IN 46845 USA. Electronic address: jan.powers@parkview.com. 2. Parkview Health System, 11109 Parkview Plaza Drive, Fort Wayne, IN 46845 USA. Electronic address: Rebecca.beaubien@parkview.com. 3. Parkview Research Center, 3948 A New Vision Drive, Fort Wayne, IN 46845 USA. Electronic address: Tressa.brunner@parkview.com. 4. Parkview Health System, 11109 Parkview Plaza Drive, Fort Wayne, IN 46845 USA. Electronic address: Kellie.girardot@parkview.com. 5. Parkview Health System, 11109 Parkview Plaza Drive, Fort Wayne, IN 46845 USA. Electronic address: Jennifer.rechter@parkview.com. 6. Parkview Health System, 11109 Parkview Plaza Drive, Fort Wayne, IN 46845 USA. Electronic address: Janette.richardson@parkview.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Frequent patient handling activities present numerous challenges to healthcare workers. A variety of products are available to assist with in-bed positioning but few comparative studies have been completed to ascertain turning effectiveness. METHODS: The purpose of this study was to compare two turning devices (air-powered positioning system with wedges versus ceiling lift with pillows) for in-bed repositioning and turning effectiveness. The study took place at a large community hospital in the Midwestern USA and used a prospective, four-group crossover study design to compare devices. RESULTS: The two turning groups were not significantly different for any of the demographic variables. The use of an air-powered positioning system with wedges achieved a greater degree of turn and maintained that turn after an hour better than the lift device with pillows. There were no hospital acquired pressure injuries in either group. CONCLUSION: The devices used demonstrated significant differences in turn angle achieved and ability to maintain the turn at one hour. Future studies need to further delineate the ideal method for turning and compare devices to identify best practice and equipment. An effective turning method would integrate ease of use with the ability to achieve an optimal degree of turn in order to prevent hospital acquired pressure injuries while also decreasing caregiver injuries.
BACKGROUND: Frequent patient handling activities present numerous challenges to healthcare workers. A variety of products are available to assist with in-bed positioning but few comparative studies have been completed to ascertain turning effectiveness. METHODS: The purpose of this study was to compare two turning devices (air-powered positioning system with wedges versus ceiling lift with pillows) for in-bed repositioning and turning effectiveness. The study took place at a large community hospital in the Midwestern USA and used a prospective, four-group crossover study design to compare devices. RESULTS: The two turning groups were not significantly different for any of the demographic variables. The use of an air-powered positioning system with wedges achieved a greater degree of turn and maintained that turn after an hour better than the lift device with pillows. There were no hospital acquired pressure injuries in either group. CONCLUSION: The devices used demonstrated significant differences in turn angle achieved and ability to maintain the turn at one hour. Future studies need to further delineate the ideal method for turning and compare devices to identify best practice and equipment. An effective turning method would integrate ease of use with the ability to achieve an optimal degree of turn in order to prevent hospital acquired pressure injuries while also decreasing caregiver injuries.