Reliability and validity of a multi-pad pressure evaluator for pressure ulcer management

Sugama, Junko; Sanada, Hiromi; Takahashi, Makoto

doi:10.1016/s0965-206x(02)80023-7

Cited by 26 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This means that patients with higher interface pressure values are at risk of developing a pressure ulcer. This study confirmed previous research, which used the same instrument (multipad pressure evaluator) for elderly patients (12). Most patients in the ICU are immobile as a result of ventilation, unconsciousness and/or sedation.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Risk factors in the development of pressure ulcers in an intensive care unit in Pontianak, Indonesia

Sanada

Sugama

Kitagawa

et al. 2007

International Wound Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to identify risk factors associated with the presence of pressure ulcer development in adult patients at an intensive care unit hospital in Indonesia. The prospective cohort design was conducted in this study. A total of 105 patients participated and a pressure ulcer developed in 35 patients. The initial analysis identified several variables as significant risk factors for pressure ulcer development (interface pressure, fecal incontinence, skin moisture, diastolic blood pressure, smoking and body temperature). However, when entered into a final multivariate analysis, four factors, interface pressure [odds ratio (OR) 17.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.1, 74.3], skin moisture (OR 8.2, 95% CI 2.2, 30.9), smoking (12.7, 95% CI 2.8, 56.7) and body temperature (OR 102.0, 95% CI 7.7, 98.8) were found to be significant. The results suggest that interface pressure measured using a multipad pressure evaluator, skin moisture measured by a moisture checker, thermometer for body temperature and smoking status are adequate instruments for the prediction of pressure ulcer development.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…The interrater reliability of interface pressure measurement was 11·4 ± 11·9%. Then a validity test found that cutoff scores for discriminating between patients with and without pressure damage were in the region of 40 mmHg or more for elderly hospital patients (12).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk factors in the development of pressure ulcers in an intensive care unit in Pontianak, Indonesia

Sanada

Sugama

Kitagawa

et al. 2007

International Wound Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The interface pressure was measured using a multipad pressure evaluator (Cello; Cape Company Ltd, Kanagawa, Japan). 19 …”

Section: Baseline Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vibration Therapy Accelerates Healing of Stage I Pressure Ulcers in Older Adult Patients

Arashi

Sugama

Sanada

et al. 2010

Advances in Skin &Amp; Wound Care

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Capillaries are assumed to close at a pressure greater than 32 mm Hg, 10 and the risk for pressure ulcers increases. 11,12 Similar to VAP, pressure ulcers have been linked to increased length of stay, 13 high costs, 14,15 and pain. 16 Support surfaces are often used to prevent skin breakdown, including low-tech foam mattresses and high-tech alternating pressure mattresses or low-air-loss beds.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Interface Pressure at Different Degrees of Backrest Elevation With Various Types of Pressure-Redistribution Surfaces

Lippoldt

Pernicka

Staudinger

2014

American Journal of Critical Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Increased elevation of the head of the bed is linked to a higher risk for sacral pressure ulcers. A semirecumbent position of at least 30° is recommended for the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia in patients treated with mechanical ventilation. Therefore, prevention of pressure ulcers and prevention of pneumonia seem to demand contradictory, possibly incompatible, positioning. Objectives To measure pressure at the interface between sacral skin and the supporting surface in healthy volunteers at different degrees of upright position with different types of mattresses. Methods An open, prospective, randomized crossover trial was conducted with 20 healthy volunteers. Interface pressure was measured by using a pressure mapping device with the participant in a supine position at 0, 10°, 30°, and 45° elevation and in the reverse Trendelenburg position at 10° and 30°. Four types of mattresses were examined: 2 different foam mattresses and 2 air suspension beds, 1 of the latter with low-air-loss technology. Results Peak sacral interface pressures increased significantly only at 45° of backrest elevation (P < .001). A mattress system with low-air-loss technology significantly reduced peak interface pressures at all angles (P < .001).The reverse Trendelenburg position led to lower peak pressures for all positions (P = .01). Conclusions Backrest elevation up to 30° might be a compromise between the seemingly incompatible demands of skin integrity and the prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia. The reverse Trendelenburg position and a mattress system with low-air-loss technology could be additional useful tools to help prevent skin breakdown at the sacrum.

show abstract

Reliability and validity of a multi-pad pressure evaluator for pressure ulcer management

Cited by 26 publications

References 3 publications

Risk factors in the development of pressure ulcers in an intensive care unit in Pontianak, Indonesia

Risk factors in the development of pressure ulcers in an intensive care unit in Pontianak, Indonesia

Vibration Therapy Accelerates Healing of Stage I Pressure Ulcers in Older Adult Patients

Interface Pressure at Different Degrees of Backrest Elevation With Various Types of Pressure-Redistribution Surfaces

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About