State-wide prevalence of pressure injury in intensive care versus acute general patients: A five-year analysis.

ABSTRACT

AIM: The aim of this study was to analyse prevalence of pressure injury in intensive care versus non-intensive care patients. BACKGROUND: Hospital-acquired pressure injury is an enduring problem. Intensive care patients are more susceptible due to multiple risk factors. Several studies have indicated that intensive care patients are more likely than general patients to develop pressure injuries. DESIGN: Secondary data analysis. METHODS: Eighteen general hospitals with intensive care units were included. The sample included all consenting patients. Logistic regression modelling was used to derive prevalence and effect estimates. STROBE reporting guidelines were followed. RESULTS: The sample comprised 15,678 patients; 611 were in intensive care. The crude prevalence estimate of hospital-acquired pressure injury was 9.6% in intensive care and 2.1% in non-intensive care patients. The ≥Stage II hospital-acquired prevalence estimate in was 8.6% intensive care and 1.2% in non-intensive care patients. Intensive care patients were at markedly increased risk of hospital-acquired pressure injury compared with non-intensive care patients, with risk persisting after adjusting for pressure injury risk score. Risk of ≥ Stage II hospital-acquired pressure injury was further elevated. Intensive care patients had a higher pressure injury risk level and developed a greater proportion of severe hospital-acquired pressure injuries than non-intensive care patients. In intensive care, most hospital-acquired pressure injuries were found on the sacrum/coccyx and heels. CONCLUSIONS: There were significant differences between the hospital-acquired pressure injury prevalence of intensive care versus non-intensive care patients, which is consistent with previous studies. Overall, the prevalence of hospital-acquired pressure injury in intensive care is relatively high, indicating that their prevention should remain a high priority within the intensive care setting. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE These results may be used for benchmarking and provide a focus for future education and practice improvement efforts. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION Neither patients nor the public were directly involved in the project.