Pressure ulcers related to medical device in intensive care in Indonesia: A prospective study

Masyitha, Khairi; Haryanto, Haryanto; Puspita, Dinarwulan; Jais, Suriadi; Usman, .

doi:10.1016/j.enfcli.2020.01.006

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this review, we found 12 studies that reported MDRPI incidence or prevalence as a primary outcome, of which eight were prospective studies. 13,22,24,27,30,[32][33][34] Despite being prospective, only two of these studies reported MMPI data, 22,27 of which only one provided sufficient data to enable calculation of incidence. 27 This finding suggests that the recommendation to collect MMPI data in incidence and prevalence studies is not being adhered to.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In three single site studies, data were reported from five, 30 four, 20 and three 33 ICUs. Sample size ranged from very small (n = 32) 32 to very large (n = 102 865). 13 Three studies included only patients with medical devices in situ, 24,32,34 therefore true cross-sectional incidence was unable to be calculated for these studies.…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sample size ranged from very small (n = 32) 32 to very large (n = 102 865). 13 Three studies included only patients with medical devices in situ, 24,32,34 therefore true cross-sectional incidence was unable to be calculated for these studies. The four largest studies, with sample sizes in excess of 2000, reported prevalence data.…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In several studies, where MDRPI was categorised by body site or medical device association, some information was reported that provides an approximation of possible MMPI (see Table 1). Three studies 30,32,37 provided some relevant ICU data by body site and four studies 20,26,30,33 provided information related to medical device association. In the study by Hanonu et al, 30 211 MDRPI were found in a sample of 175 ICU patients.…”

Section: Intensive Care Settings: Medical Device-related and Mucous Membrane Pressure Injuriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of these, 128 PI were found on the lips, nose or mouth, suggesting that the majority (61%) may have been MMPI. In the smallest study included in this review, 32 which only included ICU patients with medical devices in situ for up to 5 days, MDRPI incidence of 21.9% was calculated. Of the seven MDRPI that were reported, 29% (n = 2; lip and nose) may have been MMPI.…”

Section: Intensive Care Settings: Medical Device-related and Mucous Membrane Pressure Injuriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Systematic review: Incidence and prevalence of mucous membrane pressure injury in adults admitted to acute hospital settings

Fulbrook

Lovegrove

Miles

et al. 2021

International Wound Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mucous membrane pressure injury (MMPI) is associated with a history of medical device use at the site of injury. The current international guideline recommends they should be reported in incidence and prevalence studies. The aim of this systematic review was to analyse the incidence and prevalence of hospital-acquired MMPI in adults admitted to acute hospital settings. Database searches (EBSCO CINAHL Complete, EBSCO Medline Complete, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science) were undertaken between October 2019 and February 2021, using search terms related to hospital-acquired, mucosal and device-related pressure injury/ulcer incidence and prevalence. Searches were limited to the English language. Articles published between 2008 and 2020, reporting incidence or prevalence of mucous membrane or medical devicerelated pressure injury in non-interventional samples were selected. Two authors assessed study bias and extracted data, with a third reviewer as arbitrator. Twenty-one studies met inclusion criteria; most provided incidence data.No studies were found that specifically reported MMPI incidence or prevalence. It was possible to calculate incidence or prevalence from four studies; all were in intensive care settings. MMPI incidence of 0.8% and 30.4%, and prevalence of 1.7% and 3.7% were found. One study provided data that enabled calculation of prevalence of 0.1% in a non-intensive care sample. Only one other study provided specific data about MMPI.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Intensive Care Settings: Medical Device-related and Mucous Membrane Pressure Injuriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Intensive Care Settings: Medical Device-related and Mucous Membrane Pressure Injuriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Systematic review: Incidence and prevalence of mucous membrane pressure injury in adults admitted to acute hospital settings

Fulbrook

Lovegrove

Miles

et al. 2021

International Wound Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Development of a nomogram for predicting nasogastric tube-associated pressure injuries in intensive care unit patients

Zhang

Gou

Pei

et al. 2021

Journal of Tissue Viability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nurses’ Perceived Barriers to The Prevention of Pressure Injury and Related Factors in Indonesia

Sari

Upoyo

Sumeru

et al. 2023

JoB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Incidence of pressure injury (PI) in Indonesia is high. Therefore, Indonesian nurses should take measures to prevent PI from developing. Considering the high incidence of PI in Indonesia, there could be some barriers faced by Indonesian nurses in performing prevention of PI. However, to date, no study has assessed the perceived barriers and factors associated with perceived barrier of prevention of PI in Indonesian nurses. Therefore, this study aimed to assess perceived barriers to prevention of PI and associated factors in Indonesian nurses. Methods. A total of 521 nurses participated in the study. A pressure injury prevention barriers questionnaire was used to assess perceived barriers of prevention of PI. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to analyse factors associated with the perceived barriers. Results. The two most commonly perceived barriers in nurses were lack of preventive devices such as special mattresses, cushions, and skin care products, and a lack of training courses related to prevention of PI. Associated factors emerging from the results were working experience (AOR =1.74) and working unit (AOR =2.73).

show abstract

Pressure ulcers related to medical device in intensive care in Indonesia: A prospective study

Cited by 5 publications

References 4 publications

Systematic review: Incidence and prevalence of mucous membrane pressure injury in adults admitted to acute hospital settings

Systematic review: Incidence and prevalence of mucous membrane pressure injury in adults admitted to acute hospital settings

Development of a nomogram for predicting nasogastric tube-associated pressure injuries in intensive care unit patients

Nurses’ Perceived Barriers to The Prevention of Pressure Injury and Related Factors in Indonesia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About