Developing a pressure ulcer risk factor minimum data set and risk assessment framework

Coleman, Susanne; Nelson, E Andrea; Keen, Justin; Wilson, Lyn; McGinnis, Elizabeth; Dealey, Carol; Stubbs, Nikki; Muir, Delia; Farrin, Amanda; Dowding, Dawn; Schols, Jos M. G. A.; Cuddigan, Janet; Berlowitz, Dan R.; Jude, Edward B.; Vowden, Peter; Bader, Dan L.; Gefen, Amit; Oomens, C.W.J.; Schoonhoven, Lisette; Nixon, Jane

doi:10.1111/jan.12444

Cited by 55 publications

(74 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In keeping with those who used structured consensus methods in the development of pressure ulcer risk assessment MDS [35], the method provided a transparent approach to the development of a generic wound assessment MDS, informed, in this case by a literature review (rather than a more robust systematic review) and the opinions of experts in the field. The discussions of the expert group face-to-face meeting allowed challenges and differences in opinion to be explored and understood.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A modified RAND/UCLA (Research and Development/University of California at Los Angeles) appropriateness method [34] based on a previous consensus study was used [35]. This incorporated faceto-face interaction of an expert group and pre-and post-meeting questionnaire completion (incorporating 9 point Likert scales) considering what should be included in a generic wound assessment MDS.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While other consensus studies have incorporated limited numbers of patients/carers in their expert groups [40,41], we used a different approach in an effort to avoid under-representation of service user views [35] and some of the problems associated with reviewing complex information and facilitating mixed groups of professionals and patients [42]. This Table 3 Summary of discussions.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Development of a generic wound care assessment minimum data set

Coleman

Nelson

Vowden

et al. 2017

Journal of Tissue Viability

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tBackground: At present there is no established national minimum data set (MDS) for generic wound assessment in England, which has led to a lack of standardisation and variable assessment criteria being used across the country. This hampers the quality and monitoring of wound healing progress and treatment. Aim: To establish a generic wound assessment MDS to underpin clinical practice. Method: The project comprised 1) a literature review to provide an overview of wound assessment best practice and identify potential assessment criteria for inclusion in the MDS and 2) a structured consensus study using an adapted Research and Development/University of California at Los Angeles Appropriateness method. This incorporated experts in the wound care field considering the evidence of a literature review and their experience to agree the assessment criteria to be included in the MDS. Results: The literature review identified 24 papers that contained criteria which might be considered as part of generic wound assessment. From these papers 68 potential assessment items were identified and the expert group agreed that 37 (relating to general health information, baseline wound information, wound assessment parameters, wound symptoms and specialists) should be included in the MDS. Discussion: Using a structured approach we have developed a generic wound assessment MDS to underpin wound assessment documentation and practice. It is anticipated that the MDS will facilitate a

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Development of a generic wound care assessment minimum data set

Coleman

Nelson

Vowden

et al. 2017

Journal of Tissue Viability

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The significance of these conclusions underlines most definitions of pressure ulcers which describe the action of pressure, friction or shearing forces, or the synonym "pressure sore" is used for pressure ulcer. Coleman et al (2014) found a close relationship between immobility, friction and shear, but they also drew attention to difficulties in measuring these risk factors in clinical practice. Imbalanced nutritional state was rated as the third most significant risk factor for pressure ulcer development by the nurses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…-2017. There might be a problem in identification of the risk factor mechanical factors (e.g., shearing forces, pressure, restraint), which was also illustrated by Coleman et al (2014) related to difficulties with its measurement in clinical practice. In research studies, pressure ulcer risk prediction focuses on the use of the standardized tools which, however, have various levels of validity and reliability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

At risk of pressure ulcers - a nursing diagnosis

Poledníková¹,

Slamková²

2016

Cent Eur J Nurs Midw

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: The aim of the study was content validation of the nursing diagnosis of at Risk of Impaired Skin Integrity by a sample of Slovak nurse-experts. It focuses on identifying the major risk factors in pressure ulcer development. Design: Retrospective study. Methods: The Diagnostic Content Validity Model designed by Fehring was used for validation of the nursing diagnosis; we used it to establish the significance of the risk factors of the nursing diagnosis of at Risk of Impaired Skin Integrity in relation to pressure ulcer development. Correlation analysis was used for evaluation of the relationships between the risk factors. The sample consisted of 126 nurse-experts in accordance with modified Fehring criteria. Results: Out of 23 items, the nurses rated nine as significant (the most frequently present) risk factors (the weighted scores are shown in brackets): physical immobilisation (0.92), skeletal prominence (0.9), imbalanced nutritional state (0.86), moisture (0.86), mechanical factors (e.g., shearing forces, pressure, restraint) (0.84), a Norton Scale score of 14 ≥ points (0.81), hyperthermia (0.81), excretions (0.77), and extremes of age (0.76). Statistically significant correlations, which are positive and range between 0.2 and 0.4, were found between some risk factors. The strongest correlations were found between moisture and mechanical factors (r = 0.4008) and moisture and physical immobilization (r = 0.3072). Conclusion: Using the DCV model, the experts identified nine significant risk factors which can be predictors of pressure ulcer development.

show abstract

Using consensus methods to prioritize modifiable risk factors for development of manifestations of frailty in hospitalized older adults

Coleman

Wray

Hudson³

et al. 2022

Nursing Open

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim:The aim of the study was to reach consensus on modifiable risk factors for a novel system of care to address Manifestations of Frailty in hospitalized older adults.Design: Consensus study. Method:A modified nominal group technique, incorporating expert group face-toface interaction, review of existing evidence and pre/post-meeting questionnaire completion was undertaken November 2019-February 2020.

show abstract

Developing a pressure ulcer risk factor minimum data set and risk assessment framework

Cited by 55 publications

References 30 publications

Development of a generic wound care assessment minimum data set

Development of a generic wound care assessment minimum data set

At risk of pressure ulcers - a nursing diagnosis

Using consensus methods to prioritize modifiable risk factors for development of manifestations of frailty in hospitalized older adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About