A prediction tool for hospital-acquired pressure ulcers among surgical patients: Surgical pressure ulcer risk score.
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Case-Control Studies
Female
Humans
Iatrogenic Disease
Male
Middle Aged
Postoperative Complications
/ etiology
Predictive Value of Tests
Pressure Ulcer
/ diagnosis
Retrospective Studies
Risk Assessment
/ statistics & numerical data
Risk Factors
Severity of Illness Index
Surgical Procedures, Operative
/ adverse effects
nosocomial
pressure injury
risk assessment
surgery
surgical risk factors
Journal
International wound journal
ISSN: 1742-481X
Titre abrégé: Int Wound J
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101230907
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2019
Feb 2019
Historique:
received:
28
05
2018
revised:
11
09
2018
accepted:
16
09
2018
pubmed:
6
10
2018
medline:
7
5
2019
entrez:
6
10
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Surgical patients are prone to developing hospital-acquired pressure ulcers (HAPU). Therefore, a better prediction tool is needed to predict risk using preoperative data. This study aimed to determine, from previously published HAPU risk factors, which factors are significant among our surgical population and to develop a prediction tool that identifies pressure ulcer risk before the operation. A literature review was first performed to elicit all the published HAPU risk factors before conducting a retrospective case-control study using medical records. The known HAPU risks were compared between patients with HAPU and without HAPU who underwent operations during the same period (July 2015-December 2016). A total of 80 HAPU cases and 189 controls were analysed. Multivariate logistic regression analyses identified eight significant risk factors: age ≥ 75 years, female gender, American Society of Anaesthesiologists ≥ 3, body mass index < 23, preoperative Braden score ≤ 14, anaemia, respiratory disease, and hypertension. The model had bootstrap-corrected c-statistic 0.78 indicating good discrimination. A cut-off score of ≥6 is strongly predictive, with a positive predictive value of 73.2% (confidence interval [CI]: 59.7%-84.2%) and a negative predictive value of 80.7% (CI: 74.3%-86.1%). SPURS contributes to the preoperative identification of pressure ulcer risk that could help nurses implement preventive measures earlier.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30289624
doi: 10.1111/iwj.13007
pmc: PMC7949343
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
164-175Subventions
Organisme : SingHealth Foundation Research Grant (Health Services Research)
ID : SHF/HSRHO004/2016
Organisme : Singapore Ministry of Health's National Medical Research Council (NMRC)
ID : OFIRG15nov062
Informations de copyright
© 2018 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Ostomy Wound Manage. 2010 Feb 1;56(2):44-54
pubmed: 20200445
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014 Oct;72(10):2060-5
pubmed: 25053571
J Korean Acad Nurs. 2014 Dec;44(6):595-607
pubmed: 25608538
Int J Nurs Pract. 2014 Aug;20(4):418-23
pubmed: 25157943
Am J Nurs. 2005 Jun;105(6):70-2
pubmed: 15930875
Adv Wound Care. 1994 Mar;7(2):24-36
pubmed: 7812581
Curr Probl Dermatol. 2016;51:109-19
pubmed: 27584970
Clin Nutr. 2018 Oct;37(5):1638-1644
pubmed: 28844302
AORN J. 1997 May;65(5):933-42
pubmed: 9145169
Am J Med Qual. 2018 Jul;33(4):348-358
pubmed: 29262690
Sci Rep. 2015 Aug 11;5:13007
pubmed: 26260124
Am J Crit Care. 2012 Mar;21(2):116-25
pubmed: 22381988
Evid Based Nurs. 2011 Jan;14(1):20-1
pubmed: 21163796
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2010 Apr;65(4):377-81
pubmed: 19942592
Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2011;78(2):156-60
pubmed: 21575560
Int Wound J. 2016 Oct;13(5):809-20
pubmed: 25469585
Qual Saf Health Care. 2006 Feb;15(1):65-70
pubmed: 16456213
AORN J. 2010 Sep;92(3):272-87
pubmed: 20816101
J Phys Ther Sci. 2015 May;27(5):1543-7
pubmed: 26157260
Urol Nurs. 2010 Sep-Oct;30(5):289-95, 305
pubmed: 21067094
J Perianesth Nurs. 2013 Jun;28(3):137-43
pubmed: 23711309
Int Wound J. 2019 Feb;16(1):164-175
pubmed: 30289624
Am J Med Qual. 2015 Nov-Dec;30(6):591-7
pubmed: 25077711
Crit Care Med. 2014 Jan;42(1):40-7
pubmed: 23982023
J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2016 May-Jun;43(3):242-7
pubmed: 26983066
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017 Nov 15;42(22):1730-1736
pubmed: 28368987
Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:416896
pubmed: 25057484
AORN J. 2009 Mar;89(3):538-48; quiz 549-51
pubmed: 19269379
Int J Biometeorol. 2009 Mar;53(2):149-57
pubmed: 19048305
Ostomy Wound Manage. 2007 Feb;53(2):44-56
pubmed: 17293629
J Adv Nurs. 2007 Mar;57(5):494-504
pubmed: 17284276
AORN J. 2011 Dec;94(6):555-66
pubmed: 22118201
J Vasc Nurs. 2014 Jun;32(2):55-62
pubmed: 24944172
J Clin Anesth. 2014 Aug;26(5):368-74
pubmed: 25113424
J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2015 Mar-Apr;42(2):138-44
pubmed: 25473881
Ostomy Wound Manage. 2012 Feb;58(2):34-40
pubmed: 22316631
Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2009;9(2):1-104
pubmed: 23074524
AORN J. 2017 Jan;105(1):92-99
pubmed: 28034406
Korean J Anesthesiol. 2018 Feb;71(1):48-56
pubmed: 29441175
J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 1997 Mar;24(2):86-91
pubmed: 9204857
Wound Repair Regen. 2015 Nov-Dec;23(6):939-47
pubmed: 26171566
Electron Physician. 2016 Nov 25;8(11):3170-3176
pubmed: 28070249
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2009 Jul;57(7):1175-83
pubmed: 19486198
AORN J. 2012 Sep;96(3):251-60
pubmed: 22935254
Res Nurs Health. 1990 Oct;13(5):293-301
pubmed: 2236652
J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2017 Sep/Oct;44(5):445-449
pubmed: 28877110
Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2016 Aug 29;24:e2704
pubmed: 27579925
J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci. 2015 Apr;35(2):291-294
pubmed: 25877367