Development and Preliminary Validation of a Central Venous Access Device-Associated Skin Impairment Classification Tool Using Modified Delphi and Clinimetric Methods.

BACKGROUND: An evidence and consensus-based instrument is needed to classify central venous access device-associated skin impairments. AIM: The aim of this study was to design and evaluate the central venous access device-associated skin impairment classification tool. DESIGN: A two-phase modified Delphi study. METHODS: This two-phase study consisted of a literature review, followed by the development and validation of a classification instrument, by experts in the fields of central venous access devices and wound management (Phase 1). The instrument was tested (Phase 2) using 38 clinical photographs of a range of relevant skin impairments by the same expert panel. The expert panel consisted of registered nurses who were clinical researchers (n = 4) and clinical experts (n = 3) with an average of 24 years of nursing and research experience and 11 years of experience in wound management. Measures to assess preliminary content validity and inter-rater reliability were used. RESULTS: The instrument consists of five overarching aetiological classifications, including contact dermatitis, mechanical injury, infection, pressure injury and complex clinical presentation, with 14 associated subcategory diagnoses (e.g., allergic dermatitis, skin tear and local infection), with definitions and signs and symptoms. High agreement was achieved for preliminary scale content validity and item content validity (I-CVI = 1). Inter-rater reliability of aetiologies was high. The overall inter-rater reliability of individual definitions and signs and symptoms had excellent agreement. CONCLUSION: The development and preliminary validation of this classification tool provide a common language to guide the classification and assessment of central venous access device-associated skin impairment. IMPACT: The comprehensive and validated classification tool will promote accurate identification of central venous access device-associated skin impairment by establishing a common language for healthcare providers. The availability of this tool can reduce clinical uncertainty, instances of misdiagnosis and the potential for mismanagement. Consequently, it will play a pivotal role in guiding clinical decision-making, ultimately enhancing the quality of treatment and improving patient outcomes. REPORTING METHOD: The Guidance on Conducting and Reporting Delphi Studies (CREDES) was adhered to. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

Faculty Development on the Use of a Clinical Judgment Model in the Pre-licensure Nursing Curriculum.

Clinical judgment is an essential component of safe nursing practice that pre-licensure nursing students should develop by graduation from accredited nursing programs. For novice nurses, the consequences of underdeveloped clinical judgment skills that do not meet the demands of clinical practice are serious. This theory-practice gap correlates with increased numbers of errors occurring during care delivery, resulting in poorer patient outcomes. From a student perspective, this problem correlates with lower first-time pass rates on the NCLEX licensing exam. For nurse educators, there are uncertainties about how to resolve this complex and costly problem, but faculty development is one evidence-based solution to explore. The purpose of this article is to describe a three-pronged quality improvement project consisting of: 1) a faculty development session to teach faculty to implement the National Council State Boards of Nursing's Clinical Judgment Model (CJM) in their courses; 2) the use of the Clinical Judgment Tool; and 3) the implementation of a faculty champion to sustain and maintain ongoing faculty momentum to foster clinical judgment. This article focuses on how faculty can develop their own CJM faculty development session and use a CJM across the course curriculum.

Central Venous Access Device-Associated Skin Complications in Adults with Cancer: A Prospective Observational Study.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the prevalence and type of central venous access device-associated skin complications for adult cancer patients, describe central venous access device management practices, and identify clinical and demographic characteristics associated with risk of central venous access device-associated skin complications. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of 369 patients (626 central venous access devices; 7,682 catheter days) was undertaken between March 2017 and March 2018 across two cancer care in-patient units in a large teaching hospital. RESULTS: Twenty-seven percent (n = 168) of participants had a central venous access device-associated skin complication. In the final multivariable analysis, significant (P < .05) risk factors for skin complications were cutaneous graft versus host disease (2.1 times greater risk) and female sex (1.4 times greater risk), whereas totally implanted vascular access device reduced risk for skin complications by two-thirds (incidence risk ratio 0.37). CONCLUSION: Central venous access device-associated skin complications are a significant, potentially avoidable injury, requiring cancer nurses to be aware of high-risk groups and use evidence-based preventative and treatment strategies. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This study has confirmed how common these potentially preventable injuries are. Therefore, the prevalence of these complications could be reduced by focusing on improvements in skin assessment, reductions in central venous access device dressing variation and improving clinician knowledge of this injury.

Incidence of hospital-acquired pressure injuries and predictors of severity in a paediatric hospital.

BACKGROUND: Hospital-acquired pressure injuries (HAPIs) pose significant challenges in healthcare and cause increased patient suffering, longer hospital stays, and higher healthcare costs. Paediatric patients face unique risks, but evidence remains scarce. This study aimed to identify and describe HAPI admission incidence and severity predictors in a large Australian children's hospital. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study investigated all paediatric patients between January 2020 and December 2021 using a census approach. Demographic and clinical data including HAPI-related data were accessed from the incident monitoring and hospital administration databases. The incidence rate (per 1000 patient admissions) was calculated based on all admissions. Predictors of HAPI severity were identified using multivariable multinomial logistic regression. The study adhered to the STROBE guidelines for retrospective cohort studies. RESULTS: The HAPI incidence rate was 6.96 per 1000 patient admissions. Of the age groups, neonates had the highest HAPI incidence (15.5 per 1000 admissions). Critically ill children had the highest rate for admission location (12.8 per 1000 patient admissions). Most reported cases were stage I (64.2%). Age was associated with injury severity, with older paediatric patients more likely to develop higher-stage HAPIs. Additionally, Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander patients had a higher HAPI severity risk. CONCLUSION: HAPI injuries in paediatric patients are unacceptably high. Prevention should be prioritized, and the quality of care improved in Australia and beyond. Further research is needed to develop targeted prevention strategies for these vulnerable populations. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE: This research emphasizes the need for standardized reporting, culturally sensitive care and tailored prevention strategies. IMPACT: The research has the potential to influence healthcare policies and practices, ultimately enhancing the quality of patient care. REPORTING METHOD: STROBE guidelines. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: There was no patient or public contribution to the conduct of this study.

Perceived barriers and facilitators to preventing hospital-acquired pressure injury in paediatrics: A qualitative analysis.

AIM: This qualitative study aimed to identify nurses' and allied health professionals' perceptions and experiences of providing hospital-acquired pressure injury (HAPI) prevention in a paediatric tertiary hospital in Australia, as well as understand the perceived barriers and facilitators to preventing HAPI. DESIGN: A qualitative, exploratory study of hospital professionals was undertaken using semi-structured interviews between February 2022 and January 2023. METHODS: Two frameworks, the Capability, Opportunity and Motivation Model of Behaviour (COM-B) and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), were used to give both theoretical and pragmatic guidance. Participants included 19 nursing and allied health professionals and data analysis was informed by the framework approach. RESULTS: Analysis revealed nine core themes regarding professionals' beliefs about the barriers and facilitators to HAPI prevention practices across seven TDF domains. Themes included HAPI prevention skills and education, family-centred care, automated feedback and prompts, allocation and access to equipment, everybody's responsibility, prioritizing patients and clinical demands, organizational expectations and support, integrating theory and reality in practice and emotional influence. CONCLUSION: These findings provide valuable insights into the barriers and facilitators that impact paediatric HAPI prevention and can help identify and implement strategies to enhance evidence-based prevention care and prevent HAPI in paediatric settings. IMPACT: Overcoming barriers through evidence-based interventions is essential to reduce HAPI cases, improve patient outcomes, and cut healthcare costs. The findings have practical implications, informing policy and practice for improved preventive measures, education, and staffing in paediatric care, ultimately benefiting patient well-being and reducing HAPIs. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution. The focus of the study is on healthcare professionals and their perspectives and experiences in preventing HAPIs in paediatric patients. Therefore, the involvement of patients or the public was not deemed necessary for achieving the specific research objectives.

Incontinence during and following hospitalisation: a prospective study of prevalence, incidence and association with clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Incontinence is common in hospitalised older adults but few studies report new incidence during or following hospitalisation. OBJECTIVE: To describe prevalence and incidence of incontinence in older inpatients and associations with clinical outcomes. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of prospectively collected data from consecutive consenting inpatients age 65 years and older on medical and surgical wards in four Australian public hospitals. METHODS: Participants self-reported urinary and faecal incontinence 2 weeks prior to admission, at hospital discharge and 30 days after discharge as part of comprehensive assessment by a trained research assistant. Outcomes were length of stay, facility discharge, 30-day readmission and 6-month mortality. RESULTS: Analysis included 970 participants (mean age 76.7 years, 48.9% female). Urinary and/or faecal incontinence was self-reported in 310/970 (32.0%, [95% confidence interval (CI) 29.0-35.0]) participants 2 weeks before admission, 201/834 (24.1% [95% CI 21.2-27.2]) at discharge and 193/776 (24.9% [95% CI 21.9-28.1]) 30 days after discharge. Continence patterns were dynamic within the peri-hospital period. Of participants without pre-hospital incontinence, 74/567 (13.1% [95% CI 10.4-16.1) reported incontinence at discharge and 85/537 (15.8% [95% CI 12.8-19.2]) reported incontinence at 30 days follow-up. Median hospital stay was longer in participants with pre-hospital incontinence (7 vs. 6 days, P = 0.02) even in adjusted analyses and pre-hospital incontinence was significantly associated with mortality in unadjusted but not adjusted analyses. CONCLUSION: Pre-hospital, hospital-acquired and new post-hospital incontinence are common in older inpatients. Better understanding of incontinence patterns may help target interventions to reduce this complication.

Effect of supplements/intensive nutrition on pressure ulcer healing: a multicentre, randomised controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effectiveness of an intensive nutrition intervention or use of wound healing supplements compared with standard nutritional care in pressure ulcer (PU) healing in hospitalised patients. METHOD: Adult patients with a Stage II or greater PU and predicted length of stay (LOS) of at least seven days were eligible for inclusion in this pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial (RCT). Patients with a PU were randomised to receive either: standard nutritional care (n=46); intensive nutritional care delivered by a dietitian (n=42); or standard care plus provision of a wound healing nutritional formula (n=43). Relevant nutritional and PU parameters were collected at baseline and then weekly or until discharge. RESULTS: Of the 546 patients screened, 131 were included in the study. Participant mean age was 66.1±16.9 years, 75 (57.2%) were male and 50 (38.5%) were malnourished at recruitment. Median length of stay was 14 (IQR: 7-25) days and 62 (46.7%) had ≥2 PUs at the time of recruitment. Median change from baseline to day 14 in PU area was -0.75cm2 (IQR: -2.9_-0.03) and mean overall change in Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing (PUSH) score was -2.9 (SD 3.2). Being in the nutrition intervention group was not a predictor of change in PUSH score, when adjusted for PU stage or location on recruitment (p=0.28); it was not a predictor of PU area at day 14, when adjusted for PU stage or area on recruitment (p=0.89) or PU stage and PUSH score on recruitment (p=0.91), nor a predictor of time to heal. CONCLUSION: This study failed to confirm a significant positive impact on PU healing of use of an intensive nutrition intervention or wound healing supplements in hospitalised patients. Further research that focuses on practical mechanisms to meet protein and energy requirements is needed to guide practice.

End-user perceptions of sub-epidermal moisture scanning (SEMS) acceptability: A descriptive qualitative study.

AIMS: To assess patients' and nurses' perceptions and experiences of subepidermal moisture scanning acceptability. DESIGN: Descriptive, qualitative, sub-study, embedded within a pilot randomized control trial. METHODS: Ten patients who were in the intervention arm of the pilot trial and 10 registered nurses providing care for these patients on medical-surgical units participated in individual semi-structured interviews. Data were collected from October 2021 to January 2022. Interviews were analysed using inductive qualitative content analysis, and perspectives (patient and nurse), were triangulated. RESULTS: Four categories were found. The first category 'Subepidermal moisture scanning is acceptable as part of care' showed that patients and nurses were willing to use subepidermal moisture scanning and viewed subepidermal moisture scanning as non-burdensome. The category 'Subepidermal moisture scanning may improve pressure injury outcomes' demonstrated that although subepidermal moisture scanning was believed to prevent pressure injuries, more research evidence about its benefits was required. 'Subepidermal moisture scanning augments existing pressure injury prevention practices', the third category, highlighted that subepidermal moisture scanning aligns with current pressure injury prevention practices while making these practices more patient-centred. In the final category, 'Important considerations when making subepidermal moisture scanning routine practice', practical issues were raised relating to training, guidelines, infection control, device availability and patient modesty. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that using subepidermal moisture scanning is acceptable for patients and nurses. Building the evidence base for subepidermal moisture scanning and then addressing practical issues prior to implementation, are important next steps. Our research suggests that subepidermal moisture scanning enhances individualized and patient-centred care, persuasive reasons to continue investigating subepidermal moisture scanning. IMPACT: For an intervention to be successfully implemented it must be both effective and acceptable, however, there is limited evidence of patients' and nurses' views of SEMS acceptability. SEM scanners are acceptable to use in practice for patients and nurses. There are many procedural aspects that need to be considered when using SEMS such as frequency of measurements. This research may have benefit for patients, as SEMS may promote a more individualized and patient-centred approach to pressure injury prevention. Further, these findings can assist researchers, providing justification to proceed with effectiveness research. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: A consumer advisor was involved in study design, interpretation of data and preparation of manuscript.

Prospective Cohort Study of Remote Patient Monitoring with and without Care Coordination for Hypertension in Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: Out-of-office blood pressure (BP) measurements contribute valuable information for guiding clinical management of hypertension. Measurements from home devices can be directly transmitted to patients' electronic health record for use in remote monitoring programs. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare in primary care practice care coordinator-assisted implementation of remote patient monitoring (RPM) for hypertension to RPM implementation alone and to usual care. METHODS: This was a pragmatic observational cohort study. Patients aged 65 to 85 years with Medicare insurance from two populations were included: those with uncontrolled hypertension and a general hypertension group seeing primary care physicians (PCPs) within one health system. Exposures were clinic-level availability of RPM plus care coordination, RPM alone, or usual care. At two clinics (13 PCPs), nurse care coordinators with PCP approval offered RPM to patients with uncontrolled office BP and assisted with initiation. At two clinics (39 PCPs), RPM was at PCPs' discretion. Twenty clinics continued usual care. Main measures were controlling high BP (<140/90 mm Hg), last office systolic blood pressure (SBP), and proportion with antihypertensive medication intensification. RESULTS: Among the Medicare cohorts with uncontrolled hypertension, 16.7% (39/234) of patients from the care coordination clinics were prescribed RPM versus <1% (4/600) at noncare coordination sites. RPM-enrolled care coordination group patients had higher baseline SBP than the noncare coordination group (148.8 vs. 140.0 mm Hg). After 6 months, in the uncontrolled hypertension cohorts the prevalences of controlling high BP were 32.5% (RPM with care coordination), 30.7 % (RPM alone), and 27.1% (usual care); multivariable adjusted odds ratios (95% confidence interval) were 1.63 (1.12-2.39; p = 0.011) and 1.29 (0.98-1.69; p = 0.068) compared with usual care, respectively. CONCLUSION: Care coordination facilitated RPM enrollment among poorly controlled hypertension patients and may improve hypertension control in primary care among Medicare patients.

Pressure injury prevention practice in Australian intensive care units: A national cross-sectional survey.

INTRODUCTION: Pressure injury (PI) is an ongoing problem for patients in intensive care units (ICUs). The aim of this study was to explore the nature and extent of PI prevention practices in Australian adult ICUs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An Australian multicentre, cross-sectional study was conducted via telephone interview using a structured survey instrument comprising six categories: workplace demographics, patient assessment, PI prevention strategies, medical devices, skin hygiene, and other health service strategies. Publicly funded adult ICUs, accredited with the College of Intensive Care Medicine, were surveyed. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and chi-square tests for independence to explore associations according to geographical location. RESULTS: Of the 75 eligible ICUs, 70 responded (93% response rate). PI was considered problematic in two-thirds (68%) of all ICUs. Common PI prevention strategies included risk assessment and visual skin assessment conducted within at least 6 h of admission (70% and 73%, respectively), a structured repositioning regimen (90%), use of barrier products to protect the skin (94%), sacrum or heel prophylactic multilayered silicone foam dressings (88%), regular PI chart audits (96%), and PI quality improvement projects (90%). PI prevention rounding and safety huddles were used in 37% of ICUs, and 31% undertook PI research. Although most ICUs were supported by a facility-wide skin integrity service, it was more common in metropolitan ICUs than in rural and regional ICUs (p < 0.001). Conversely, there was greater involvement of occupational therapists in PI prevention in rural or regional ICUs than in metropolitan ICUs (p = 0.026). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: This is the first study to provide a comprehensive description of PI prevention practices in Australian ICUs. Findings demonstrate that PI prevention practices, although nuanced in some areas to geographical location, are used in multiple and varied ways across ICUs.

The effect of sub-epidermal moisture on pressure injury prevention strategies and incidence of pressure injuries: A feasibility pilot randomised controlled trial.

AIM: Sub-epidermal moisture scanning (SEMS) is a novel point-of-care technology that measures localised oedema and detects early tissue damage that may develop into a pressure injury (PI). It provides objective data that may assist PI prevention (PIP) decision making. This study aimed to determine the feasibility of undertaking a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) to test the effectiveness of SEMS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This pilot RCT recruited medical and surgical patients at risk of developing a PI in one Australian hospital. All participants received routine PIP care and daily visual skin assessment to determine the presence of a PI. The intervention group also received daily SEMS. Clinical staff were told if the sub-epidermal moisture (SEM) value was abnormal but were not given advice for PIP. Blinding of patients, care staff and outcome assessors was not practical. Feasibility outcomes included recruitment, retention, intervention fidelity, and patient outcomes. RESULTS: Of 1185 patients screened prior to eligibility, 950 were excluded (80%); 235 were then assessed for eligibility and 160 met the inclusion criteria (68.1%); 100 were recruited (70.0%) and randomised and 99 completed the trial (intervention n = 50; control n = 49) with one person withdrawn due to inappropriate recruitment (100% retention). Of the 657 expected SEMS observations, 598 were completed (91% intervention fidelity). Only 34 of 454 (7.4%) patient outcome data points were missing. CONCLUSIONS: Most feasibility criteria were met, indicating a definitive trial to assess the effectiveness of SEMS in a medical-surgical patient population is realistic. However, recruitment may be resource intensive and require specific strategies.

Completing accreditation during the COVID-19 pandemic: A step-by-step process for success.

Many higher-education administrative processes have transitioned to the online environment due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Nursing program accreditation site visits were not spared from this shift. This article describes the step-by-step online, interactive, and collaborative process one nursing department used for program re-accreditation. Kotter's 8-step process for accelerating change informed this work. Positive outcomes included increased faculty engagement and knowledge in the accreditation process and an ongoing accreditation readiness team. Recommendations include forming an accreditation committee, appointing program champions, utilizing a learning management system and a cloud-based storage system, and celebrating successes. This process could be replicated by other nursing programs undergoing accreditation.

Securing jugular central venous access devices with dressings fixed to a liquid adhesive in an intensive care unit population: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Central venous access devices (CVADs) can have high rates of failure due to dressing-related complications. CVADs placed in the internal jugular vein are at particular risk of dressing failure-related complications, including catheter-associated bloodstream infection and medical adhesive-related skin injury. Application of Mastisol liquid adhesive (MLA) may reduce CVAD dressing failure and associated complications, by reducing the frequency of dressing changes. The aim of this study is to investigate whether, in an intensive care unit (ICU) population, standard dressing care with or without the addition of MLA, improves internal jugular CVAD dressing adherence. METHODS: This two-arm, parallel group randomised controlled trial will be conducted in three Australian ICUs. A total of 160 patients (80 per group) will be enrolled in accordance with study inclusion and exclusion criteria. Patients will be randomised to receive either (1) 'standard' (in accordance with local hospital policy) CVAD dressings (control) or (2) 'standard' dressings in addition to MLA (intervention). Patients will be followed from the time of CVAD insertion to 48 h after CVAD removal. The primary outcome is 'dressing failure' defined as requirement for initial CVAD dressing to be replaced prior to seven days (routine replacement). DISCUSSION: This study will be the first randomised controlled trial to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of MLA in the adult intensive care unit population and will also provide crucial data for patient-important outcomes such as infection and skin injury. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12621001012864 . Registered on 2 August 2021.

Pressure injuries in Australian public hospitals: A cost of illness study.

BACKGROUND: Pressure injuries are a leading hospital adverse event, yet they are mostly preventable. Understanding their financial costs will help to appreciate the burden they place on the health system and assist in better planning and management of health expenditures to prevent pressure injuries. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost of pressure injuries in Australian public hospitals in 2020 demonstrating its economic burden in a well-resourced health system. METHODS: A cost of illness study with a 12-month time horizon was conducted. Resource use for the treatment of pressure injuries and productivity loss due to pressure injuries were derived using a bottom-up approach. Parameters of the cost estimates were obtained from secondary sources and literature syntheses. A simulation with 10,000 draws was used to generate statistical properties of the cost estimates. RESULTS: Based on a prevalence of 12.9%, the total cost of pressure injuries in Australian public hospitals was $9.11 billion [95% confidence intervals: 9.02, 9.21]. The two largest shares of costs were accounted for by the opportunity cost of excess length of stay of $3.60 billion [3.52, 3.68] and treatment costs of $3.59 billion [3.57, 3.60]. Productivity loss associated with pressure injuries amounts to $493 million [482, 504]. Hospital-acquired pressure injuries account for a total of $5.50 billion [5.44, 5.56], whereas pressure injuries present on admissions costed $3.71 billion [3.70, 3.72]. In terms of severity, Stage 2 pressure injuries contributed the most to total treatment costs, total excessive length of stay, and total loss of healthy life years. Australian society is willing to pay $1.43 billion [1.40, 1.45] to save 6,701 [6,595; 6,807] healthy life years lost by pressure injury. CONCLUSIONS: Reducing preventable pressure injuries and stopping the progression of Stage 1 pressure injuries will likely result in an immense cost-saving for Australia and will likely have similar benefits for other countries with comparable profiles. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Australian public hospital study provides comprehensive analysis of the cost of pressure injury, including estimates of direct and indirect medical costs, and indirect non-medical costs - such as productivity and quality of life.

Oedema as a predictor of the incidence of new pressure injuries in adults in any care setting: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Oedema measurement, also termed sub-epidermal moisture measurement is recommended as an adjunct pressure injury prevention intervention in international guidelines because it indicates early tissue damage. OBJECTIVE: To determine the prognostic value of oedema measurement in predicting future pressure injury in adults in any care setting. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. SETTING: Participants were recruited from nursing homes or aged care facilities, hospitals, or post-acute facilities. PARTICIPANTS: Adults. METHODS: A modified 2-week systematic review was undertaken. Study designs included cohort (prospective and retrospective), case-control, case series if relevant comparisons were reported, randomised controlled trials if the association between oedema measurement and pressure injury was reported, and registry data. Databases searched included: Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, The Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Excerpta Medica and the Cochrane Library from inception to 13 July 2021 with no language restrictions. Screening, data extraction using Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies - Prognostic Factors (CHARMS-PF) and quality assessment using Quality in Prognostic Factor Studies (QUIPS) were undertaken independently by ≥2 authors and adjudicated by another if required. Meta-analyses and meta-regression were undertaken. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: Six studies (n = 483 total) were included. Two studies were set in nursing homes and four in either hospitals or post-acute facilities. Fives studies were prospective cohorts, and one was a randomised control trial. Two studies were assessed as low risk and four studies as moderate risk of bias. The pooled risk ratio in four studies (n = 388) for the relationship between oedema and pressure injury cumulative incidence was 18.87 (95% CI 2.13-38.29) and for time to pressure injury was 4.08 days (95% CI 1.64-6.52). Using GRADE, the certainty of the body of evidence was low for all outcomes. Meta-regression indicated that age, gender, and sample size were poor predictors for the association between oedema and pressure injury. CONCLUSIONS: Measuring oedema as a predictor for pressure injury development is showing promise but a stronger body of evidence that takes into consideration other prognostic factors is needed to better understand its benefit. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021267834. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Measuring oedema is a promising strategy to prevent pressure injuries but the certainty of evidence for this claim is low.

Development and Psychometric Testing of a Knowledge Instrument on Incontinence-Associated Dermatitis for Clinicians: The Know-IAD.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to describe the development and evaluation of the psychometric properties of an instrument used to assess clinician knowledge of Incontinence-associated dermatitis (IAD). DESIGN: The instrument was developed in three phases: Phase 1 involved item development; Phase 2 evaluated content validity of the instrument by surveying clinicians and stakeholders within a single state of Australia and, Phase 3 used a pilot multisite cross-sectional survey design to determine composite reliability and evaluate scores of the knowledge tool. SUBJECTS AND SETTINGS: In Phase 1, the instrument was developed by five persons with clinical and research subject expertise in the area of IAD. In Phase 2, content validity was evaluated by a group of 13 clinicians (nurses, physicians, occupational therapists, dietitians, and physiotherapists) working in acute care across one Australian state, New South Wales, along with two consumer representatives. In Phase 3, clinicians, working across six hospitals in New South Wales and on wards with patients diagnosed with incontinence-associated dermatitis, participated in pilot-testing the instrument. METHODS: During Phase 1, a group of local and international experts developed items for a draft tool based on an international consensus document, our prior research evaluating incontinence-associated dermatitis knowledge, and agreement among an expert panel of clinicians and researchers. Phase 2 used a survey design to determine content validity of the knowledge tool. Specifically, we calculated item- and scale-level content validity ratios and content validity indices for all questions within the draft instrument. Phase 3 comprised pilot-testing of the knowledge tool using a cross-sectional survey. Analysis involved confirmatory factor analysis to confirm the hypothesized model structure of the knowledge tool, as measured by model goodness-of-fit. Composite reliability testing was undertaken to determine the extent of internal consistency between constituent items of each construct. RESULTS: During Phase 1, a draft version of the Barakat-Johnson Incontinence-Associated Dermatitis Knowledge tool (Know-IAD), comprising 19 items and divided into three domains of IAD-related knowledge: 1) Etiology and Risk, 2) Classification and Diagnosis, and 3) Prevention and Management was developed. In Phase 2, 18 of the 19 items demonstrated high scale content validity ratios scores on relevance (0.75) and clarity (0.82); and high scale-content validity indices scores on relevance (0.87) and clarity (0.91). In Phase 3, the final 18-item Know-IAD tool demonstrated construct validity by a model goodness-of-fit. Construct validity was excellent for the Etiology and Risk domain (root mean squared error=0.02) and Prevention and Management domain (root mean squared error=0.02); it was good for the Classification and Diagnosis domain (root mean squared error=0.04). Composite reliability (CR) was good in the Etiology and Risk domain (CR=0.76), Prevention and Management domains (CR=0.75), and adequate in the Classification and Diagnosis domain (CR=0.64). Respondents had good understanding of etiology and risk (72.6% correct responses); fairly good understanding of prevention and management of IAD (64.0% correct responses) and moderate understanding of classification and diagnosis (40.2% correct responses). CONCLUSIONS: The Know-IAD demonstrated good psychometric properties and provides preliminary evidence that it can be applied to evaluate clinician knowledge on IAD.

Process evaluation of an intervention to test the effectiveness of foam border dressings in preventing hospital-acquired sacral pressure injuries (the EEPOC trial): A protocol.

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic foam border dressings are recommended for high-risk patients in addition to standard pressure injury prevention protocols despite limited high-quality evidence regarding their effectiveness. This protocol describes the process evaluation that will be undertaken alongside a multisite randomised controlled trial investigating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of these dressings in reducing hospital-acquired sacral pressure injury incidence. METHODS: This theory informed parallel process evaluation using qualitative and quantitative methods will be undertaken in medical and surgical units. To evaluate fidelity, recruitment, reach, dose delivered and received, and context, process data will include: research nurses' self-reported adherence to intervention protocols; semi-structured interviews with participants and research nurses and focus groups with nursing staff; participants' satisfaction and comfort with the dressings and perceived level of participation in pressure injury prevention; and nurses' attitudes toward pressure injury prevention. The proportion of the target population recruited, participant characteristics, and adherence to intervention protocols will be reported using descriptive statistics. Chi square or t-tests will compare differences in demographic characteristics between groups, and non-participants, and multivariate modelling will investigate potential moderators on the trial outcomes. Analysis of qualitative data will be guided by the Framework Method, which provides a clear, systematic process for developing themes. DISCUSSION: This process evaluation will provide valuable insights into mechanisms of impact and contextual and moderating factors influencing trial outcomes. Process data will enhance reproducibility of the intervention and trustworthiness of findings, and inform clinicians, researchers, and policy makers about the extent to which foam border dressings can be feasibly implemented in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12619000763145p.

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.