Establishing the sensitivity and specificity of the gynaecological cancer distress screen.

OBJECTIVE: Nuanced distress screening tools can help cancer care services manage specific cancer groups' concerns more efficiently. This study examines the sensitivity and specificity of a tool specifically for women with gynaecological cancers (called the Gynaecological Cancer Distress Screen or DT-Gyn). METHODS: This paper presents cross-sectional data from individuals recently treated for gynaecological cancer recruited through Australian cancer care services, partner organisations, and support/advocacy services. Receiver operating characteristics analyses were used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the DT-Gyn against criterion measures for anxiety (GAD-7), depression (patient health questionnaire), and distress (IES-R and K10). RESULTS: Overall, 373 individuals aged 19-91 provided complete data for the study. Using the recognised distress thermometer (DT) cut-off of 4, 47% of participants were classified as distressed, while a cut-off of 5 suggested that 40% had clinically relevant distress. The DT-Gyn showed good discriminant ability across all measures (IES-R: area under the curve (AUC) = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.82-0.90; GAD-7: AUC = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.85-0.93; K10: AUC = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.85-0.92; PHQ-9: AUC = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.81-0.89) and the Youden Index suggested an optimum DT cut-point of 5. CONCLUSIONS: This study established the psychometric properties of the DT-Gyn, a tool designed to identify and manage the common sources of distress in women with gynaecological cancers. We suggest a DT cut point ≥5 is optimal in detecting 'clinically relevant' distress, anxiety, and depression in this population.

The frequency and reasons for missed nursing care in Australian perioperative nurses: A national survey.

AIM: To describe Australian perioperative nurses' reported frequency and reasons for missed nursing care in the operating room. DESIGN: Cross-sectional online survey conducted in March-April 2022. METHODS: A census of Australian perioperative nurses who were members of a national professional body were invited to complete a survey that focussed on their reported frequency of missed nursing care and the reasons for missed nursing care in the operating room using the MISSCare Survey OR. RESULTS: In all, 612 perioperative nurses completed the survey. The perioperative and intraoperative nursing care tasks reported as most frequently missed included time-intensive tasks and communication with multiple surgical team members present. The most frequently reported reasons for missed care were staffing-related (e.g. staff number, skill mix, fatigue and complacency) and affected teamwork. There were no significant differences in the frequency of missed care based on perioperative nurse roles. However, there were statistically significant differences between nurse management, circulating/instrument nurses and recovery room nurses in reasons for missed care. CONCLUSIONS: Much of the missed care that occurs in the operating room is related to communication practices and processes, which has implications for patient safety. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: Understanding the types of nursing care tasks being missed and the reasons for this missed care in the operating room may offer nurse managers deeper insights into potential strategies to address this situation. REPORTING METHOD: Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution.

Psychometric validation of the Perceived Perioperative Competence Scale-Revised Short Form.

AIM: To develop a parsimonious, shortened version of the Perceived Perioperative Competence Scale-Revised for perioperative nurses to complete as part of their specialty training while retaining good psychometric properties. DESIGN: A longitudinal online survey was adopted. METHODS: A national sample of perioperative nurses from Australia completed an online survey at two different time points 6 months apart between February and October 2021. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted for item reduction and construct validity, while criterion, convergent validity and internal consistency were examined. RESULTS: Usable data for psychometric assessment were obtained from 485 operating room nurses at time 1 and 164 nurses at time 2. The original 40-item revised scale was reduced to an 18-item measure, maintaining its six domains. Cronbach's alpha for the 18-item scale was .92 at time 1 and .90 at time 2. Scale validation demonstrated moderate to weak positive relationships in perceived competence scores relative to general self-efficacy, years of operating room experience, postgraduate education and recency of training. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest the 18-item Perceived Perioperative Competence Scale-Revised Short Form has initial robust psychometric properties and may be implemented in clinical settings as part of perioperative transition-to-practice, orientation programs and yearly professional development reviews. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION: This short-form scale can help prepare perioperative nurses to demonstrate clinical competence in a climate of increasing professional demands using a valid measure of competence required in clinical practice. IMPACT: Short and validated scales of perioperative competence are needed in clinical practice. Assessment of practising operating room nurses' perceived competence is essential in quality care provision, workforce planning and human resource management. This study provides an 18-item measure of the previously validated 40-item Perceived Perioperative Competence Scale-Revised. This scale can help provide an option for future testing of perioperative nurses' competence in clinical or research settings. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Perioperative nurses were involved in the design of the study, particularly in the assessment of validation of the tools used in the study.

Incidence of wound dehiscence in patients undergoing laparoscopy or laparotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Surgical wound dehiscence (SWD) is a serious complication-with a 40% estimated mortality rate-that occurs after surgical intervention. Since the implementation of advanced recovery protocols, the current global incidence of SWD is unknown. This systematic review and meta-analysis estimated the worldwide incidence of SWD and explored its associated factors in general surgical patients. Eligible full-text cross-sectional, cohort and observational studies in English, between 1 January 2010 to 23 April 2021, were retrieved from MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library. Data extraction and quality appraisal were undertaken independently by three reviewers. Random effects meta-analytic models were used in the presence of substantial inconsistency. Subgroup, meta-regression and sensitivity analyses were used to explore inconsistency. Publication bias was assessed using Hunter's plots and Egger's regression test. Of 2862 publications retrieved, 27 studies were included in the final analyses. Pooled data from 741,118 patients across 24 studies were meta-analysed. The 30-day cumulative incidence of SWD was 1% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1-1%). SWD incidence was highest in hepatobiliary surgery, at 3% (95% CI: 0-8%). Multivariable meta-regression showed SWD was significantly associated with duration of operation and reoperation (F=7.93 (2-10); p=0.009), explaining 58.2% of the variance. Most studies were retrospective, predated the agreed global definition for SWD and measured as a secondary outcome; thus, our results likely underestimate the scope of the problem. Wider uptake of the global definition will inform the SWD surveillance and improve the accuracy of reporting.

Development of a Wound Assessment Tool for Use in Adults at End of Life: A Modified Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND: Some patients at end of life (EOL) develop wounds known as Kennedy terminal ulcers, terminal ulcers, and Skin Changes At Life's End. However, there is ambiguity around the defining wound characteristics of these conditions and a lack of validated clinical assessment tools available to identify them. OBJECTIVE: To gain consensus on the definition and characteristics of EOL wounds and establish the face and content validity of a wound assessment tool for use in adults at EOL. METHODS: Using a reactive online Delphi technique, international wound experts reviewed the 20 items in the tool. Over two iterative rounds, experts assessed item clarity, relevance, and importance using a four-point content validity index. The content validity index scores were calculated for each item, with a level of 0.78 or higher signifying panel consensus. RESULTS: Round 1 included 16 panelists (100.0%). The agreement for item relevance and importance ranged from 0.54% to 0.94%, and item clarity scored between 0.25% and 0.94%. Following round 1, four items were removed, and seven others reworded. Other suggestions included changing the tool name and including Kennedy terminal ulcer, terminal ulcer, and Skin Changes At Life's End in the EOL wound definition. In round 2, the now 13 panel members agreed with the final 16 items included and suggested minor wording changes. CONCLUSIONS: This tool could provide clinicians with an initially validated tool to accurately assess EOL wounds and gather much needed empirical prevalence data. Further research is needed to underpin accurate assessment and the development of evidence-based management strategies.

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.

Screening for distress in women with gynaecological cancer: Adaptation of the distress thermometer for gynaecological oncology patients.

OBJECTIVE: Generic distress screening tools may not recognise the unique concerns reported in some cancer populations. The face and content validity of a screening tool derived from the National Cancer Comprehensive Network distress thermometer and problem list and adapted specifically for women with gynaecological cancer is presented. METHODS: Building on existing work, panels of clinicians and researchers, and focus groups with women treated for gynaecological cancer, developed a nuanced distress screening tool. RESULTS: The clinical reference group used an iterative process to reduce 54 items to 22 across four domains (practical/family/psychological/physical). These items were included in the draft tool, which was reviewed by two focus groups of long-term cancer survivors. Participants unanimously thought the tool was necessary though several changes were recommended. The final draft tool contained a global distress score and 25 items across the four domains. CONCLUSIONS: This measure provides a structured screening tool tailored to the concerns of women with gynaecological cancer, enhancing communication between clinicians and their patients about potentially identified and unrecognised sources of distress. Future research will focus on establishing sensitivity and specificity of this tool and further assessing its utility in clinical settings for all gynaecological cancers (including rare cancers like vulvar cancer).

Prevention and treatment of pressure injuries: A meta-synthesis of Cochrane Reviews.

BACKGROUND: There are many high-quality systematic reviews to inform practice around pressure injury (PI) prevention and treatment. However, they are often unable to provide recommendations for practice and research due to low quality trials. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate current systematic review evidence on the prevention and treatment of PI. METHODS: This meta-synthesis was guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Only Cochrane Reviews were included. Evidence from reviews was independently screened and assessed for risk of bias and certainty using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations by two authors, with a third resolving discrepancies. Methodological quality of included reviews was assessed using the second version of A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews, and a narrative synthesis undertaken. RESULTS: Twenty-five Cochrane Reviews were included; eight for PI prevention and 19 for PI treatment. Prevention reviews included 102 studies (27,933 participants). Treatment reviews included 154 studies (over 16,936 participants). Three prevention reviews and nine treatment reviews reported risk of bias, judging the included trials as having low or very low certainty evidence. Two reviews reported moderate certainty evidence. Methodological quality of the systematic reviews was rated as high for eight reviews (7/19 for treatment and 1/6 for prevention). Recommendations for prevention included repositioning, nutrition and support surfaces. Recommendations for treatment focused on nutrition and repositioning. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-synthesis confirms the low-certainty of PI prevention and treatment trials, resulting in few recommendations to inform clinical practice. Generation of high-quality evidence on PI prevention and treatment is imperative.

Patient involvement in surgical wound care research: A scoping review.

Active involvement of patients in planning, conducting, and disseminating research has been adopted by many organisations internationally, but the extent to which this occurs in surgical wound care is not evident. This scoping review aimed to identify how patients have been involved in surgical wound care research and the quality of its reporting. Full-text studies focused on preoperative and postoperative surgical wound care in the acute care setting, published in English between 2004 and 2019, were included in the review. Screening, data charting, and quality assessment were conducted by two reviewers independently, adjudicated by a third, and then reviewed by five others. Thematic analysis synthesised the findings. Of the eight included studies, seven explained the methods for patient involvement and five described aims related to patient involvement and commented on patient involvement in the discussion. None met all of the quality assessment criteria. Three themes emerged: involvement in modifying and refining research processes, connecting and balancing expert and patient views, and sharing personal insights. Recommendations to improve patient involvement in surgical wounds research include the following: using framework and tools to inform future research; training researcher and patients in their respective research roles; and ongoing monitoring of patient involvement.

Incidence and Prevalence of Pressure Injuries in Adult Intensive Care Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically assess the incidence and prevalence of pressure injuries in adult ICU patients and the most frequently occurring pressure injury sites. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. STUDY SELECTION: Observational studies reporting incidence rates, cumulative incidence, and prevalence of pressure injuries. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. Meta-analyses of pooled weighted estimates were calculated using random effect models with 95% CIs reported due to high heterogeneity. Sensitivity analyses included studies that used skin inspection to identify a pressure injury, studies at low risk of bias, studies that excluded stage 1 and each stage of pressure injury. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-two studies, 10 reporting cumulative incidence of pressure injury irrespective of stage, one reporting incidence rate (198/1,000 hospital-days), and 12 reporting prevalence were included. The 95% CI of cumulative incidence and prevalence were 10.0-25.9% and 16.9-23.8%. In studies that used skin inspection to identify pressure injuries, the 95% CI of cumulative incidence was 9.4-27.5%; all prevalence studies used skin inspection therefore the results were unchanged. In studies assessed as low risk of bias, the 95% CI of cumulative incidence and prevalence were 6.6-36.8% and 12.2-24.5%. Excluding stage 1, the 95% CI of cumulative incidence and prevalence were 0.0-23.8% and 12.4-15.5%. Five studies totalling 406 patients reported usable data on location; 95% CI of frequencies of PIs were as follows: sacrum 26.9-48.0%, buttocks 4.1-46.4%, heel 18.5-38.9%, hips 10.9-15.7%, ears 4.3-19.7%, and shoulders 0.0-40.2%. CONCLUSIONS: Although well-designed studies are needed to ensure the scope of the problem of pressure injuries is better understood, it is clear prevention strategies are also required.

Using normalisation process theory to evaluate the implementation of a complex intervention to embed the surgical safety checklist.

BACKGROUND: The surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) was introduced in 2008 to improve teamwork and reduce the mortality and morbidity associated with surgery. Although mandated in many health care institutions around the world, challenges in implementation of the SSC continue. To use Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) to help understand how/why implementation of a complex intervention coined Pass The Baton (PTB) could help explain what facets of the Surgical Safety Checklist use led to its' integration in practice, while others were not. METHODS: A longitudinal multi-method study using survey and interviews was undertaken. Implementation of PTB involved; change champions, audit and feedback, education and prompts. Following implementation, surgical teams were surveyed using the NOrmalization MeAsure Development (NoMAD) and subsequently interviewed to explore the impact of PTB on their use of the checklist at 6 and 12 months respectively. Respondents' self-reported perceptions of implementation of PTB was explained using the four NPT constructs; coherence, cognitive participation, collective action, and reflexive monitoring. Survey data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Interview data were coded inductively and content analysed using a framework derived from NPT. RESULTS: The NoMAD survey response rate was 59/150 (39.3%). Many (45/59, 77.6%) survey respondents saw the value in PTB, while 50/59 (86.2%) would continue to use it; 45/59 (77.6%) believed that PTB could easily be integrated into existing workflows, and 48/59 (82.8%) thought that feedback could improve PTB in the future. A total of 8 interviews were completed with 26 surgical team members. Nurses and physicians held mixed views towards coherence while buy-in and participation relied on individuals' investment in the implementation process and the ability to modify PTB. Participants generally recognised the benefit and value of using PTB in the ongoing implementation the checklist. CONCLUSIONS: Workarounds and flexible co-construction in implementation designed to improve team communications in surgery may facilitate their normalisation in practice.

Perceptions of perioperative nursing competence: a cross-country comparison.

BACKGROUND: Throughout many countries, professional bodies rely on yearly self-assessment of competence for ongoing registration; therefore, nursing competence is pivotal to safe clinical practice. Our aim was to describe and compare perioperative nurses' perceptions of competence in four countries, while examining the effect of specialist education and years of experience in the operating room. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of cross-sectional surveys from four countries including; Australia, Canada, Scotland, and Sweden. The 40-item Perceived Perioperative Competence Scale-Revised (PPCS-R), was used with a total sample of 768 respondents. We used a factorial design to examine the influence of country, years of experience in the operating room and specialist education on nurses' reported perceived perioperative competence. RESULTS: Regardless of country origin, nurses with specialist qualifications reported higher perceived perioperative competence when compared to nurses without specialist education. However, cross-country differences were dependent on nurses' number of years of experience in the operating room. Nurses from Sweden with 6-10 years of experience in the operating room reported lower perceived perioperative competence when compared to Australian nurses. In comparing nurses with > 10 years of experience, Swedish nurses reported significantly lower perceived perioperative competence when compared to nurses from Australia, Canada and Scotland. CONCLUSION: Researchers need to consider educational level and years of experience in the perioperative context when examining constructs such as competence.

Initial psychometric testing and validation of the patient participation in pressure injury prevention scale.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to develop the Patient Participation in Pressure injury Prevention (PPPIP) scale and undertake initial testing of some of its psychometric properties. BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines recommend patient involvement in pressure injury prevention. There is some evidence that patients are willing to participate in this activity, but there are currently no instruments to measure this participation. DESIGN: This methodological study used data collected as part of a cluster randomized trial to develop and test the PPPIP scale. METHODS: A sample of 688 of patients with complete PPPIP scale data was used. A stratified random subsample, (Subsample A) was created and the remainder became Subsample B. Item analysis, exploratory factor analysis and Cronbach's alpha reliability were undertaken in Subsample A. Confirmatory factor analysis and Cronbach's alpha reliability were undertaken in Subsample B. Data collection occurred between June 2014 - May 2015. RESULTS: In Subsample A (n = 320), inter-item correlations, item total correlations met the acceptance criteria and an exploratory factor analysis identified a one factor solution. In Subsample B (n = 368), the confirmatory factor analysis supported this one factor. In both subsamples, the Cronbach's alpha was 0·86. CONCLUSION: This study provides preliminary evidence of acceptable reliability and validity of the PPPIP scale in two subsamples of hospitalized patients who had limited mobility. It may be used in research and quality improvement activities. As a better conceptual understanding of patient participation emerges, the PPPIP scale may require refinement.

The person-centred care of older people with cognitive impairment in acute care (POPAC) scale - psychometric evaluation.

AIM: To test the reliability and validity of the Person-centred care of Older People with cognitive impairment in Acute Care scale to determine nurses' perceptions of person-centred care. BACKGROUND: One-third of older adults admitted to hospital are at risk of serious hospital-acquired complications such as falls, infections and pressure injuries because of cognitive impairment. These risks can be reduced through person-centred practices. The Person-centred care of Older People with cognitive impairment in Acute Care scale is a self-report staff instrument to explore the extent to which person-centred practices are undertaken; however psychometric testing is limited. METHODS: A cross-sectional sample of acute care nurses (n = 240) in Queensland, Australia completing self-report questionnaires. Psychometric analyses of item performance, reliability and validity were conducted. RESULTS: Item analysis revealed independent items. One item was removed due to negatively associating with the scale, improving total Cronbach's alpha from 0.76 to 0.84. The three original factors were maintained with regrouping of items. Confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the revised model. CONCLUSIONS: The revised Person-centred care of Older People with cognitive impairment in Acute Care scale had satisfactory psychometric properties when used as a total scale. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Scale brevity and simplicity together with rigorous development and testing indicates that the revised Person-centred care of Older People with cognitive impairment in Acute Care may be useful for quality improvement programmes into the care of older people in hospitals.

Adherence to evidence-based pressure injury prevention guidelines in routine clinical practice: a longitudinal study.

The aim of this longitudinal study was to describe adherence to evidence-based pressure injury (PI) prevention guidelines in routine clinical practice in Australian hospitals. Data were analysed from four control sites of a larger-cluster randomised trial of a PI intervention. The sample of 799 included 220 (27·5%) Not at risk, 344 (43·1%) At risk and 110 (13·8%) At high risk patients. A total of 84 (10·5%) patients developed a PI during the study: 20 (9·0% of 220) in the Not at risk group, 45 (13·1% of 344) in the At risk group, 15 (13·6% of 110) in the At high risk group and 4 (3·2% of 125) patients who did not have a risk assessment completed. Of all patients, 165 (20·7%) received only one PI prevention strategy, and 494 (61·8%) received ≥2 strategies at some point during the study period. There was no statistical difference in the proportion of time the three risk groups received ≥1 and ≥2 strategies; on average, this was less than half the time they were in the study. Thus, patients were not receiving PI prevention strategies consistently throughout their hospital stay, although it is possible patients' risk changed over the study period.

The effect of pressure injury prevention care bundles on pressure injuries in hospital patients: A complex intervention systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Numerous interventions for pressure injury prevention have been developed, including care bundles. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the effectiveness of pressure injury prevention care bundles on pressure injury prevalence, incidence, and hospital-acquired pressure injury rate in hospitalised patients. DATA SOURCES: The Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (via PubMed), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EMBASE, Scopus, the Cochrane Library and two registries were searched (from 2009 to September 2023). STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies with a comparison group published in English after 2008 were included. Studies reporting on the frequency of pressure injuries where the number of patients was not the numerator or denominator, or where the denominator was not reported, and single subgroups of hospitalised patients were excluded. Educational programmes targeting healthcare professionals and bundles targeting specific types of pressure injuries were excluded. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Bundles with ≥3 components directed towards patients and implemented in ≥2 hospital services were included. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: Screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessments were undertaken independently by two researchers. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted. The certainty of the body of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation. RESULTS: Nine studies (seven non-randomised with historical controls; two randomised) conducted in eight countries were included. There were four to eight bundle components; most were core, and only a few were discretionary. Various strategies were used prior to (six studies), during (five studies) and after (two studies) implementation to embed the bundles. The pooled risk ratio for pressure injury prevalence (five non-randomised studies) was 0.55 (95 % confidence intervals 0.29-1.03), and for hospital-acquired pressure injury rate (five non-randomised studies) it was 0.31 (95 % confidence intervals 0.12-0.83). All non-randomised studies were at high risk of bias, with very low certainty of evidence. In the two randomised studies, the care bundles had non-significant effects on hospital-acquired pressure injury incidence density, but data could not be pooled. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: Whilst some studies showed decreases in pressure injuries, this evidence was very low certainty. The potential benefits of adding emerging evidence-based components to bundles should be considered. Future effectiveness studies should include contemporaneous controls and the development of a comprehensive, theory and evidence-informed implementation plan. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42023423058. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Pressure injury prevention care bundles decrease hospital-acquired pressure injuries, but the certainty of this evidence is very low.

Effectiveness of discharge education for patients undergoing general surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is some evidence to suggest that discharge education may reduce the risk of postoperative complications, however, a critical evaluation of the body of evidence is needed. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of discharge education interventions versus standard education given to general surgery patients prior to, or up to 30-days of hospital discharge on clinical and patient-reported outcomes. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical outcomes were 30-day surgical site infection incidence and re-admission up to 28 days. Patient-reported outcomes included patient knowledge, self-confidence, satisfaction, and quality of life. SETTING: Participants were recruited from hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Adult general surgical patients. METHODS: MEDLINE (Pubmed), CINAHL (EBSCO), EMBASE (Elsevier) and the Cochrane Library were searched in February 2022. Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies of interventions published between 2010 and 2022, with adults undergoing general surgical procedures receiving discharge education on surgical recovery, including wound management, were eligible for inclusion. Quality appraisal was undertaken using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 and the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Nonrandomised Studies. The Grading of Assessment, Development, Recommendations, and Evaluation was used to assess the certainty of the body of evidence based on the outcomes of interest. RESULTS: Ten eligible studies (eight randomised control trials and two non-randomised studies of interventions) with 965 patients were included. Six randomised control trials assessed the effect of discharge education interventions on 28-day readmission (Odds ratio 0.88, 95 % confidence interval 0.56-1.38). Two randomised control trials assessed the effect of discharge education interventions on surgical site infection incidence (Odds ratio = 0.84, 95 % confidence interval 0.39-1.82). The results of the non-randomised studies of interventions were not pooled due to heterogeneity in outcome measures. The risk of bias was either moderate or high for all outcomes, and the body of evidence using GRADE was judged as very low for all outcomes studied. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of discharge education on the clinical and patient-reported outcomes of patients undergoing general surgery cannot be determined due to the uncertainty of the evidence base. Despite the increased use of web-based interventions to deliver discharge education to general surgery patients, larger samples in more rigorous multicentre randomised control trials with parallel process evaluations are needed to better understand the effect of discharge education on clinical and patient-reported outcomes. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021285392. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Discharge education may reduce the likelihood of surgical site infection and hospital readmission but the body of evidence is inconclusive.

Variations in sacral sub-epidermal moisture measurements in hospitalized medical and surgical patients: A longitudinal observational sub-study.

BACKGROUND: Pressure injury risk assessment tools have several well-known limitations. As a result, new methods of assessing risk are emerging, including the use of sub-epidermal moisture measurement to detect localized edema. AIMS: To assess the daily variation in sacral sub-epidermal moisture measurement over five days and establish if age and prophylactic sacral dressing use influenced these measurements. METHODS: As part of a larger randomized controlled trial of the use of prophylactic sacral dressings, a longitudinal observational substudy was undertaken in hospitalized medical and surgical adult patients at risk of pressure injury. The substudy was conducted in consecutively recruited patients from 20 May 2021 to 9 November 2022. Using the SEM 200 (Bruin Biometrics LLC), daily sacral sub-epidermal measurements for up to five days were completed. Two measurements were generated, the most recent sub-epidermal moisture measurement and, after at least three measurements, a delta value, the difference between the highest and lowest values. The delta measurement was the outcome, with a delta of ≥0.60 considered abnormal, increasing the risk of pressure injury development. A mixed analysis of covariance was undertaken to determine if there was any change in delta measurements over the five days and to determine if age and sacral prophylactic dressing use influenced sub-epidermal moisture delta measurement. RESULTS: A total of 392 participants were included in this study; 160 (40.8%) patients had completed five consecutive days of sacral sub-epidermal moisture delta measurements. In total, 1324 delta measurements were undertaken across the five study days. In total, 325 of 392 patients (82.9%) had experienced one or more abnormal delta. Furthermore, 191 (48.7%) and 96 (24.5%) of patients experienced abnormal deltas for two or more and three or more consecutive days. There was no statistically significant variation in sacral sub-epidermal moisture delta measurements over time; increasing age and prophylactic dressing use did not influence sub-epidermal moisture deltas over the five days. CONCLUSION: If only one abnormal delta was used as a trigger, about 83% of patients would have received additional pressure injury prevention strategies. But, if a more nuanced approach to responding to abnormal deltas is taken, between 25 and 50% of patients may receive additional pressure injury prevention, representing a more time and resource efficient approach. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Sub-epidermal moisture delta measurements did not vary over 5 days; increasing age and prophylactic dressing use did not influence these measurements.

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.