Evaluation of the National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators (NDNQI) Training Program on Pressure Ulcers

Abstract

The National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators (NDNQI) Pressure Ulcer Training Program was developed to improve nursing accuracy and reliability in identifying and staging pressure ulcers and differentiating hospital- and unit-acquired from community-acquired pressure ulcers. Of 5,200 individuals who completed the training program within 5 months of release, 937 provided written evaluation comments. Four major themes emerged from content analysis of the evaluation remarks: pressure ulcer and other wound pictures; accuracy and clarity of content; program design and technology; and the educational/informational experience. Reviewers most frequently commented on their positive learning experience. Program components that enhanced the educational experience included the array of pressure ulcer pictures at each stage and pictures of other wounds. Clarity of content, program design, and technological problems were barriers to reviewer satisfaction. Findings suggest the NDNQI Pressure Ulcer Training Program was effective for educating staff nurses on pressure ulcer identification and staging.

Strategies to support pressure injury best practices by the inter‐professional team: A systematic review

“…Another study examined participant experiences with a national nursing quality indicator PI training programme . The programme consisted of 4 modules on different topics related to PI identification and staging and 3 tests.…”

“…The programme consisted of 4 modules on different topics related to PI identification and staging and 3 tests. Study findings revealed that participants valued: high‐quality photos of PIs during training with short narrative descriptions next to the picture; accurate, clear, and relevant information; and technology‐facilitated learning (eg, ability to get immediate feedback, flexibility with reviewing module content) . While the previously mentioned components enhanced the educational experience of participants, there were barriers to participants’ satisfaction related to clarity of content, programme design, and technological problems.…”

“…There is a particular need to focus on PI education in primary and long‐term care, where the knowledge on PI prevention and management among health care providers (ie, physicians and nurses) is particularly lacking . Various PI prevention and treatment‐related education strategies were identified in the literature to improve health care provider knowledge, including e‐learning linked to technical support and lecture programmes along with reading and study days on PI prevention and treatment . Health care providers learn in differing ways, and therefore, education needs to be provided with varied methods to meet diverse learning needs .…”

Evaluation of evidence-based nursing education of hospital acquired pressure injury prevention in clinical practice: An integrative review

“…Findings suggested the NDNQI Pressure Ulcer Training Program effectively educated nursing staffs on pressure injury identification and staging. [10] The findings of another study conducted by Samariwo (2010) demonstrated how participants underwent a transition from placing a low to a high value on pressure injury prevention and how this affected patient care. [11] The pivotal moment in this transition appeared to be when nurses encountered patients with high stage pressure injuries, which caused the nurses to be concerned, more-so than lower stage pressure injuries.…”

“…[9] Bergquist-Beringer et al (2009) studied the National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators (NDNQI) Pressure Ulcer Training Program to determine its effectiveness in educating nurses about HAPI. [10] The NDNQI Pressure Ulcer Training Program was created to improve nursing reliability and accuracy for the identification and staging of pressure injuries and the ability to determine the differences in hospital-and unit-acquired injuries from those acquired in the community. A total of 5,200 individuals completed the training program within the first five months of release, and 937 of those participants provided written evaluation comments.…”