Exploring medical device-related pressure injuries in a single intensive care setting: A longitudinal point prevalence study.

OBJECTIVES: To report longitudinal prevalence rates of device-related pressure injuries in critically ill adult patients in the intensive care unit and to explore the patient characteristics associated with the development of device related pressure injuries. RESEARCH DESIGN: A prospective observational design where observations of patients' skin integrity were conducted on one day each week for 52 weeks. SETTING: The study was conducted in the 36-bed intensive care unit of a major metropolitan tertiary referral hospital in Queensland, Australia. The sample included all patients aged 18 years or older admitted to the intensive care unit before midnight on the day preceding the observation, with a medical device in situ. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was device related pressure injuries identified at the weekly observations and defined as a pressure injury found on the skin or mucous membrane with a history of medical device in use at the location of the injury. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics were recorded. RESULTS: Over the study period, 11.3% (71/631) of patients developed at least one hospital-acquired DRPI. The most common devices associated with injury were nasogastric/nasojejunal tubes (41%) and endotracheal tubes (27%). Significant predictors of device related pressure injuries were the total number of devices (OR 1.230, 95% CI 1.09-1.38, p < 0.001), the length of time in the ICU (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02-1.09, p = 0.003), male sex, (OR 2.099, 95% CI 1.18-3.7, p = 0.012), and increased severity of illness score on admission (OR 1.044, 95% CI 1.01-1.09, p = 0.013). CONCLUSION: Device related pressure injuries are an all-too-common iatrogenic problem for this vulnerable patient cohort.

Implementation and evaluation of multilayered pressure injury prevention strategies in an Australian intensive care unit setting.

BACKGROUND: Pressure injuries are a ubiquitous, yet largely preventable, hospital acquired complication commonly seen in critically ill patients in the intensive care unit. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to implement targeted evidence-based pressure injury prevention strategies and evaluate their effect through measurement of patient pressure injury observations. METHODS: A prospective multiphased design was used in the intensive care unit of an Australian tertiary referral hospital using three study periods (period 1, weeks 1-18; period 2, weeks 19-28; and period 3, weeks 29-52). The interventions included staff-focused interventions and patient-focused interventions, with the latter defined in a work unit guideline. Weekly visual observations of critically ill patients' skin integrity were conducted by trained research nurses over 52 weeks from November 2015 to November 2016. The primary outcome measure was a pressure injury of any stage, identified at the weekly observation, and the effect of the intervention was evaluated through logistic regression. Reporting rigour has been demonstrated using the Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence checklist. RESULTS: Over the whole study, 15.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 12.6, 18.2%, 97/631) of patients developed a pressure injury, with the majority of these injuries (73.2%, 95% CI = 64.4%, 82.0%, 71/97) caused by medical devices. After adjustment for covariates known to influence hospital-acquired pressure injury development, pressure injury rates for period 3 compared with period 1 were reduced (odds ratio = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.20-0.97, p = 0.0126). CONCLUSIONS: We found the use of defined pressure injury prevention strategies targeted at both staff and patients reduced pressure injury prevalence.

Exploring Incontinence-Associated Dermatitis in a Single Center Intensive Care Unit: A Longitudinal Point Prevalence Survey.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to provide longitudinal prevalence rates of incontinence-associated dermatitis (IAD) in patients in an intensive care unit (ICU) and to identify patient characteristics associated with IAD development. DESIGN: Prospective observational. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: The sample comprised 351 patients aged 18 years and older in a major metropolitan public hospital ICU in Queensland, Australia. METHODS: All consenting, eligible participants at risk of developing IAD underwent weekly skin inspections to determine the presence of IAD. Data were collected weekly for 52 consecutive weeks. Descriptive statistics described the study sample and logistic regression analysis was used to identify patient characteristics associated with development of IAD. RESULTS: The weekly IAD prevalence ranged between 0% and 70%, with IAD developing in 17% (n = 59/351) of ICU patients. The odds of IAD developing increased statistically significantly with increasing age (odds ratio [OR]: 1.029, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.005-1.054, P = .016), time in the ICU (OR = 1.104; 95% CI: 1.063-1.147, P < .001), and Bristol Stool chart score (OR = 4.363, 95% CI: 2.091-9.106, P < .001). Patients with respiratory (OR = 3.657, 95% CI: 1.399-9.563, P = .008) and sepsis (OR = 3.230, 95% CI: 1.281-8.146, P = .013) diagnoses had increased odds of developing IAD. CONCLUSIONS: These data show the high variability of IAD prevalence over a 1-year period. Characteristics associated with the development of IAD in patients in the ICU included older age, longer lengths of ICU stay, incontinent of liquid feces, and having respiratory or sepsis diagnoses.

Understanding contextual barriers and enablers to pressure injury prevention practice in an Australian intensive care unit: An exploratory study.

BACKGROUND: Skin integrity management is often a low clinical priority in the intensive care environment, possibly resulting in high pressure injury (PI) prevalence. This article reports the results of the first phase of a multiphased project, "Translating evidence-based pressure injury prevention strategies to the intensive care environment (SUSTAIN study)". The SUSTAIN study used a research translation framework to guide the assessment of research uptake, development, and monitoring of translational strategies to reduce PIs. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to assess the enablers and barriers to research translation of evidence-based skin integrity management in one Australian tertiary referral intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: This exploratory study was conducted in an Australian metropolitan tertiary ICU on a sample of 204 registered nurses. Data were collected using (i) a descriptive cross-sectional cohort survey of barriers, enablers, and attitudes to PI prevention, (ii) a cross-sectional survey of PI knowledge, and (iii) focus groups to understand the local contextual factors impacting registered nurses' PI prevention practice. RESULTS: Participants reported a moderate to high ability to rise above barriers in PI prevention, a positive attitude towards PI prevention, and considered this a priority in their care of patients. High patient acuity emerged as a barrier to implementing timely PI prevention strategies. In the knowledge, test participants with postgraduate qualifications answered more statements correctly. Focus group data revealed four themes: (i) team ICU, (ii) processes of care, (iii) education for consistency, and (iv) the patient. CONCLUSIONS: It is essential that evidence-based PI prevention strategies are provided in the intensive care environment. Our findings indicate that despite positive attitudes and sound knowledge levels, high patient acuity is a significant barrier to evidence implementation.

Reducing pressure injuries in critically ill patients by using a patient skin integrity care bundle (InSPiRE).

PURPOSE: To test an interventional patient skin integrity bundle, the InSPiRE protocol, for reducing pressure injuries in critically ill patients in an Australian adult intensive care unit. METHODS: Before and after design: patients receiving the intervention (InSPiRE protocol) were compared with a similar control group who received standard care. Data collected included demographic and clinical variables, skin assessment, presence and stage of pressure injuries, and score on the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA). RESULTS: Overall, 207 patients were enrolled, 105 in the intervention group and 102 in the control group. Most patients were men (mean age, 55 years). The groups were similar on major demographic variables (age, SOFA scores, intensive care unit stay). Cumulative incidence of pressure injuries was significantly lower in the intervention group (18.1%) than in the control group (30.4%) for skin injuries ( [Formula: see text], P = .04) and mucous injuries (t = 3.27, P ≤ .001). Significantly fewer pressure injuries developed over time in the intervention group (log rank = 11.842, df = 1, P ≤ .001) and intervention patients had fewer skin injuries (> 3 pressure injuries/patient = 1/105) than did control patients (> 3 pressure injuries/patient = 10/102; P = .02). CONCLUSION: The intervention group, receiving the InSPiRE protocol, had a lower cumulative incidence of pressure injuries, and fewer and less severe pressure injuries that developed over time. Systematic and ongoing assessment of the patient's skin and risk for pressure injuries as well as implementation of tailored prevention measures are central to preventing pressure injuries.