Pressure injuries in critical patients: Incidence, patient-associated factors, and nursing workload

Abstract

Aim:To estimate the incidence of pressure injury and its predictors including nursing workload in critical patients. Background:There is controversy about the influence of the nursing workload on the occurrence of pressure injury in intensive care units. Methods:A retrospective cohort of 766 patients in nine intensive care units of two university hospitals was studied. The nursing workload was measured using the Nursing Activities Score. The predictors were identified by logistic regression. Results:The pressure injury incidence was 18.7%. The odds ratio of the development of pressure injury, increased 3.5 times in mechanical ventilation (p < 0.001), 7.8 times in palliative care (p = 0.004), 2.3 times in the 60-84 years old group (p = 0.005); it also increased 10% for each day of hospitalization (p < 0.001), and 1.5% for each registered point of the Nursing Activities Score (p = 0.016). Conclusion:Existing risks for the development of pressure injury have been confirmed and nursing workload identified as a new predictor. Much still needs to be done in the area of prevention, especially in groups at risk. Implications for Nursing Management:Increasing nursing resources in the intensive care unit may assist in reducing the pressure injury rate. K E Y W O R D Sincidence, intensive care units, nursing, pressure ulcer, workload | 309 STRAZZIERI-PULIDO ET AL.

Evidence on the effect of position change on pressure ulcer among hospitalized adult patients in Ethiopia: systematic review and meta-analysis

“…On the other hand, our finding is higher than a study done in China 1.58% a [19],3.3% in Turkish Hospital [20], and 3.22% in South-west Nigeria [23]. In contrary, the current study is low than 17.23% in Sub-Saharan Tertiary Centre [22], 18.2% in Norwegian [17], 18.7 % in Brazil [21],and 19.3 % in Tunisia [24]. The possible explanations for the above variations might be methodological differences (i.e., data analysis and eligibility of study participants), variation in quality of care and educational preparation among health care provider, policy and strategy difference.…”

“…Numerous studies have shown substantial variation on the prevalence of pressure ulcers among hospitalized patients across the globe and revealed that the prevalence pressure ulcer was 14•9% in Swedish [16] ,18.2% in Norwegian [17],10.1% in São Paulo [18], 1.58% in China [19],3.3% in Turkish Hospital [20], 18.7 % in Brazil [21], 17.23% in Sub-Saharan Tertiary Centre [22], 3.22% in South-west Nigeria [23], and 19.3 % in Tunisia [24].…”

Evidence on the Effect of Position Change on Pressure Ulcer among Hospitalized Adult Patients in Ethiopia: Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

“…in South-west Nigeria [23]. In contrary, the current study is low than 17.23% in Sub-Saharan Tertiary Centre [22], 18.2% in Norwegian [17], 18.7 % in Brazil [21],and 19.3 % in Tunisia [24].…”

“…Numerous studies have shown substantial variation on the prevalence of pressure ulcers among hospitalized patients across the globe and revealed that the prevalence pressure ulcer was 14• 9% in Swedish [16] , 18.2% in Norwegian [17],10.1% in Sã o Paulo [18], 1.58% in China [19],3.3% in Turkish Hospital [20], and 18.7 % in Brazil [21]. On the other hand in Africa the magnitude of PU was 17.23% in Sub-Saharan Tertiary Centre [22], 3.22% in South-west Nigeria [23], 19.3 % in Tunisia [24].Furthermore, the prevalence of PUs in Ethiopia was 13.4% Wolaita Sodo University Teaching Hospital [25], 16.3% in Hiwot fana referral hospital [26],and 14.9% in Dessie Referral Hospital [27].…”

Medical-Device-Related Pressure Injury on Adults: An Integrative Review

“…13 These epidemiological data are essential indicators of the quality of the care provided and are used as a tool for evaluating and proposing new strategies and protocols for their prevention. 28 Another important issue is the differentiation between PI and MDRPI. PI is more related to immobility, localization and bony prominences; MDRPI, on the other hand, often mirrors the device location.…”