This study aimed to investigate Korean nurses' level of knowledge, attitude, and performance of pressure ulcer prevention in long‐term care facilities. A descriptive study was performed. Convenience sampling was used, and registered nurses were recruited from the attendees of a continuing education programme for nurses in long‐term care facilities. A total of 282 participants (RN) completed the questionnaire. Data were collected from September to December 2015. Nurses participating in this study demonstrated a moderate level of knowledge of pressure ulcer prevention (60.1%) and exhibited positive attitudes towards pressure ulcer prevention (33.80 ± 2.48). Nurses regularly assessed the risk factors of pressure ulcers during the hospitalisation period for all patients in the hospital when performing pressure ulcer prevention care. However, the plan for preventive nursing care was not properly reviewed. It was also found that nurses did not consider changes in the patient's condition as important to why they had to change their nursing plans to prevent pressure ulcer. Therefore, this study suggested that appropriate guidelines, education programmes, and an environment that makes it possible to provide continuing education should be created for nurses to prevent pressure ulcers in Korea's long‐term care facilities.

The aims of this randomised controlled study were to determine whether the application of silicone adhesive dressings with standard preventive care would reduce the impairment of skin integrity and to evaluate the subepidermal moisture (SEM) value in anatomical locations to predict impairment of skin integrity. Of the 71 intensive care unit patients enrolled, 35 and 31 were randomly assigned to the intervention and control groups, respectively. The SEM value was measured at each site (the coccyx, sacrum, and both buttocks) repeatedly three times at every dressing change. Collected data were analysed by multivariate linear regression, and least square means analysis was used to compare the SEM value at the sites of pressure injury (PI) and blanching erythema. There were fewer PIs (1 vs 9) and incidences of blanching erythema (5 vs 6) in the intervention group than in the control group (P = 0.006). The SEM value and difference of the SEM value from the initial value was higher in the group with PIs than in the group without PIs (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.001, respectively). There was a statistically significant difference in the incidence of impaired skin integrity between the groups. The SEM value may be an indicator for detecting impairment of skin integrity.

Pressure ulcers result in financial losses, including the cost of unnecessary medical expenses because of extended hospital stays, treatment, and examination. This was a retrospective, observational, methodological study to develop quality indicators related to pressure ulcer development and validate risk adjustment factors for pressure ulcer development. We performed a literature review to develop risk adjustment factors, and an expert group performed a content validity test. To validate risk adjustment factors for pressure ulcer development using electronic medical records, 127 patients admitted to a long‐term care hospital in South Korea from June to September 2015 were enrolled in the study. Pressure ulcer risk factors were peripheral vascular disease, end‐stage disease, past pressure ulcer history, high risk group for pressure ulcer development, fever, haemoglobin, and albumin (all P < 0.05); only albumin (odds ratio: 0.210, P < 0.001) was significantly associated with pressure ulcer development as an independent risk factor. Further research with a large sample size is needed for the validation of risk adjustment factors. Risk‐adjusted quality indicators for pressure ulcer development can be used to evaluate the quality of nursing care and compare outcomes after preventive pressure ulcer care activities or between long‐term care hospitals.