pressure ulcer Archives - Critical Care Science (CCS)
Abstract
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2013;25(2):106-114
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20130021
OBJECTIVE: To Translate into Portuguese and evaluate the measuring properties of the Sunderland Scale and the Cubbin & Jackson Revised Scale, which are instruments for evaluating the risk of developing pressure ulcers during intensive care. METHODS: This study included the process of translation and adaptation of the scales to the Portuguese language, as well as the validation of these tools. To assess the reliability, Cronbach alpha values of 0.702 to 0.708 were identified for the Sunderland Scale and the Cubbin & Jackson Revised Scale, respectively. The validation criteria (predictive) were performed comparatively with the Braden Scale (gold standard), and the main measurements evaluated were sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and area under the curve, which were calculated based on cutoff points. RESULTS: The Sunderland Scale exhibited 60% sensitivity, 86.7% specificity, 47.4% positive predictive value, 91.5% negative predictive value, and 0.86 for the area under the curve. The Cubbin & Jackson Revised Scale exhibited 73.3% sensitivity, 86.7% specificity, 52.4% positive predictive value, 94.2% negative predictive value, and 0.91 for the area under the curve. The Braden scale exhibited 100% sensitivity, 5.3% specificity, 17.4% positive predictive value, 100% negative predictive value, and 0.72 for the area under the curve. CONCLUSIONS: Both tools demonstrated reliability and validity for this sample. The Cubbin & Jackson Revised Scale yielded better predictive values for the development of pressure ulcers during intensive care.
Abstract
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2013;25(2):106-114
DOI 10.5935/0103-507X.20130021
OBJECTIVE: To Translate into Portuguese and evaluate the measuring properties of the Sunderland Scale and the Cubbin & Jackson Revised Scale, which are instruments for evaluating the risk of developing pressure ulcers during intensive care. METHODS: This study included the process of translation and adaptation of the scales to the Portuguese language, as well as the validation of these tools. To assess the reliability, Cronbach alpha values of 0.702 to 0.708 were identified for the Sunderland Scale and the Cubbin & Jackson Revised Scale, respectively. The validation criteria (predictive) were performed comparatively with the Braden Scale (gold standard), and the main measurements evaluated were sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and area under the curve, which were calculated based on cutoff points. RESULTS: The Sunderland Scale exhibited 60% sensitivity, 86.7% specificity, 47.4% positive predictive value, 91.5% negative predictive value, and 0.86 for the area under the curve. The Cubbin & Jackson Revised Scale exhibited 73.3% sensitivity, 86.7% specificity, 52.4% positive predictive value, 94.2% negative predictive value, and 0.91 for the area under the curve. The Braden scale exhibited 100% sensitivity, 5.3% specificity, 17.4% positive predictive value, 100% negative predictive value, and 0.72 for the area under the curve. CONCLUSIONS: Both tools demonstrated reliability and validity for this sample. The Cubbin & Jackson Revised Scale yielded better predictive values for the development of pressure ulcers during intensive care.
Abstract
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2010;22(2):175-185
DOI 10.1590/S0103-507X2010000200012
OBJECTIVE: The avoidance of pressure ulcers development in critically ill patients is a major nursing challenge. Prevention is thus relevant for assurance of high quality care. This study aimed to evaluate the applicability of the Braden scale in intensive care unit patients. METHODS: This was a prospective study based which evaluated all adult patients staying in the intensive care unit from July 14 to August 10, 2009. The data were collected using the Braden's scale by three examiners who identified the pressure ulcer development risk. The data were analyzed using the SAS Statistical Software. For determination of the examiners' rates degree of coincidence, the Kappa value was used (95%CI). RESULTS: Regarding the related risk factors: 36.4% had mild sensory perception impairment; 50.9% had occasionally moist skin; 97.3% bedfast; 39.1% had very limited mobility; 45% probably had inappropriate nutrition; 61.8% had friction and shear problems. An agreement between the examiners was identified for nutrition and physical activity (38.1% to 100.0%); the Kappa population zero hypothesis was rejected; a paired examiners agreement (41.7% to 100.0%) was identified for the items humidity and physical activity, and the Kappa values ranged from 0.13 to 1. CONCLUSIONS: These intensive care patients were identified to have increased risk of developing pressure ulcers. This tool was considered appropriate to support the implementation of preventive measures.
Abstract
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2010;22(2):175-185
DOI 10.1590/S0103-507X2010000200012
OBJECTIVE: The avoidance of pressure ulcers development in critically ill patients is a major nursing challenge. Prevention is thus relevant for assurance of high quality care. This study aimed to evaluate the applicability of the Braden scale in intensive care unit patients. METHODS: This was a prospective study based which evaluated all adult patients staying in the intensive care unit from July 14 to August 10, 2009. The data were collected using the Braden's scale by three examiners who identified the pressure ulcer development risk. The data were analyzed using the SAS Statistical Software. For determination of the examiners' rates degree of coincidence, the Kappa value was used (95%CI). RESULTS: Regarding the related risk factors: 36.4% had mild sensory perception impairment; 50.9% had occasionally moist skin; 97.3% bedfast; 39.1% had very limited mobility; 45% probably had inappropriate nutrition; 61.8% had friction and shear problems. An agreement between the examiners was identified for nutrition and physical activity (38.1% to 100.0%); the Kappa population zero hypothesis was rejected; a paired examiners agreement (41.7% to 100.0%) was identified for the items humidity and physical activity, and the Kappa values ranged from 0.13 to 1. CONCLUSIONS: These intensive care patients were identified to have increased risk of developing pressure ulcers. This tool was considered appropriate to support the implementation of preventive measures.
Abstract
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2007;19(3):337-341
DOI 10.1590/S0103-507X2007000300012
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Pressure ulcers (PU) constitute an important health problem in particular in the intensive care unit (ICU). The objective of the study was to identify the number, degree and total score of PU on admission, ICU stay and discharge as well as to recognize factors influencing the appearance or development of PU and to identify the number of healed PU, thus so the incidence and prevalence. METHODS: All patients admitted > 24 hrs were prospectively included during one year. Seventy patients were excluded for insufficient data. The prevention protocol (Norton scale; positioning according the risk grade) and therapeutic protocol (hydrocolloid dressings; hydrogel dressings if tissue necrosis and/or devitalized and alginate dressings if ulcer bleeds) was applied to all patients. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty five patients were studied. Eighteen patients were admitted already with PU. During ICU stay, 40 patients developed a total of 125 PU. The prevalence of PU was 37.41% and incidence was 25.8%. The development of new PU occurred on average by the 7th day. Patients with PU presented 2.6 PU on the average. Seventy nine percent of the patients admitted in the ICU remained stable or improved. Patients admitted with PU had a SAPS 2 significantly higher than those without, 54 ± 8.7 and 44 ± 17, respectively (p = 0.015). At the day of discharge, patients classified as high risk had significantly more PU (p = 0.039). Non-survivors had significantly more PU than survivors (p < 0.001). Patients with longer ICU stay had more PU (p < 0.001) CONCLUSIONS: In our patient population we found 37.41% prevalence and 25.8% incidence of PU. The present prevention protocol of PU was effective in 79% of the patients; severely ill patients developed PU more frequently.
Abstract
Rev Bras Ter Intensiva. 2007;19(3):337-341
DOI 10.1590/S0103-507X2007000300012
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Pressure ulcers (PU) constitute an important health problem in particular in the intensive care unit (ICU). The objective of the study was to identify the number, degree and total score of PU on admission, ICU stay and discharge as well as to recognize factors influencing the appearance or development of PU and to identify the number of healed PU, thus so the incidence and prevalence. METHODS: All patients admitted > 24 hrs were prospectively included during one year. Seventy patients were excluded for insufficient data. The prevention protocol (Norton scale; positioning according the risk grade) and therapeutic protocol (hydrocolloid dressings; hydrogel dressings if tissue necrosis and/or devitalized and alginate dressings if ulcer bleeds) was applied to all patients. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty five patients were studied. Eighteen patients were admitted already with PU. During ICU stay, 40 patients developed a total of 125 PU. The prevalence of PU was 37.41% and incidence was 25.8%. The development of new PU occurred on average by the 7th day. Patients with PU presented 2.6 PU on the average. Seventy nine percent of the patients admitted in the ICU remained stable or improved. Patients admitted with PU had a SAPS 2 significantly higher than those without, 54 ± 8.7 and 44 ± 17, respectively (p = 0.015). At the day of discharge, patients classified as high risk had significantly more PU (p = 0.039). Non-survivors had significantly more PU than survivors (p < 0.001). Patients with longer ICU stay had more PU (p < 0.001) CONCLUSIONS: In our patient population we found 37.41% prevalence and 25.8% incidence of PU. The present prevention protocol of PU was effective in 79% of the patients; severely ill patients developed PU more frequently.
Search
Search in:
Case reports (56) Child (53) Coronavirus infections (34) COVID-19 (46) Critical care (116) Critical illness (54) Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (26) Infant, newborn (27) Intensive care (72) Intensive care units (256) Intensive care units, pediatric (31) mechanical ventilation (38) Mortality (76) Physical therapy modalities (28) Prognosis (61) Respiration, artificial (119) Respiratory insufficiency (26) risk factors (34) SARS-CoV-2 (28) Sepsis (98)