Incidence and risk factors for pressure injuries in patients who have undergone vascular operations: a scoping review

Abstract

Background Patients who have undergone vascular operations are thought to be at an increased risk for developing pressure injuries; however, the extent to which pressure injuries occur in this population is not clear. This scoping review sought to summarize what is known about the incidence of pressure injuries, and the risk factors for the development of pressure injuries in patients who have undergone vascular operations. Main An initial search identified 2564 articles, and 9 English language studies were included. Results showed that due to study design limitations in the available literature preventing hospital-acquired and present on admission pressure injuries to be distinguished, it is difficult to ascertain the incidence rate of pressure injuries in this population. Conclusion Certain vascular procedures were found to be higher risk for the development of pressure injuries such as major amputations and lower extremity bypass surgery. In addition to procedural risk factors, patient factors were identified that may be associated with the development of pressure injuries in the vascular population, and these in the authors’ view deserve further exploration. Overall, this scoping review identified an area ripe for future research, the results of which would have implications for wound care in healthcare institutions and at home.

Evaluating the Effectiveness of an Alternating Pressure Overlay in Patients Undergoing Cardiothoracic Surgery

“…A recent scop-ing review found that the incidence of PIs in these patients ranged from 17.2% to 45%, and varied according to procedure. 1 The 2018-2019 International Pressure Ulcer Prevalence (IPUP) Survey of 296,014 acute care patients determined a 6.3% prevalence rate for critical care surgical patients (n = 5,367) and 6% for critical care cardiac patients (n = 5,385). 4 Since the IPUP Survey did not include a classification for cardiothoracic surgery patients, no prevalence rate for these patients could be derived from this study.…”

“…PIs are defined as damage to the skin and underlying soft tissue, usually occurring over bony regions of the body, and are classified into four stages based on severity. 1,2 Stage 1 indicates a nonblanchable redness of the skin, with staging progressing to stage 2 (partial loss of skin), stage 3 (full-thickness skin loss), and stage 4 (full-thickness skin and tissue loss). 2 In a study by Alderden and colleagues that included 4,934 critical care patients who presented to the hospital with no preexisting PIs, 7% (n = 352) developed a HAPI; additionally, 50% of the stage 1 HAPIs worsened into more severe stages, although the study does not indicate the stages reached.…”

“…Patients who have undergone vascular surgery are at an elevated risk for developing PIs. A recent scoping review found that the incidence of PIs in these patients ranged from 17.2% to 45%, and varied according to procedure 1. The 2018-2019 International Pressure Ulcer Prevalence (IPUP) Survey of 296,014 acute care patients determined a 6.3% prevalence rate for critical care surgical patients (n = 5,367) and 6% for critical care cardiac patients (n = 5,385) 4.…”

“…Pressure injuries (PIs) that develop during an inpatient stay are known as hospital-acquired pressure injuries (HAPIs) and are associated with worse health outcomes and increased costs. PIs are defined as damage to the skin and underlying soft tissue, usually occurring over bony regions of the body, and are classified into four stages based on severity 1, 2. Stage 1 indicates a nonblanchable redness of the skin, with staging progressing to stage 2 (partial loss of skin), stage 3 (full-thickness skin loss), and stage 4 (full-thickness skin and tissue loss) 2.…”

Explore the effect of pressure and time of compression on the risk of intraoperatively acquired pressure injury based on theoretical framework: A prospective study

“…In previous studies, BMI, height, weight, nutritional status and other indicators were mostly used to assess the risk. [19][20][21][22][23] Based on the theoretical framework of the study, this study adopted objective measurement tools to explore the risk factors from the perspective of the pathogenesis of IAPI, and also provided basis for the accurate assessment of IAPI in the future.…”