Key stakeholders' perspectives: A gap analysis of hospital-acquired pressure injuries.

INTRODUCTION: Hospital-acquired pressure injuries (HAPIs) are a global high-stakes patient safety issue. Key stakeholder perspectives regarding their role and experiences with pressure injuries is critical as part of the solution to minimizing HAPI occurrence and attain sustainability. DESIGN: A qualitative, descriptive approach provided multiple perspectives of key stakeholders to support the complexity of HAPI care. The qualitative data are a part of a mixed method convergent research study examining pressure injury prevention and management practices. METHODS: Nursing system theory, mixed method convergent design, and participatory action research methodologies were chosen to address both the gap analysis development and results, achieve collaborative comprehensiveness, and enable key stakeholder involvement throughout this HAPI prevention and management initiative. Participants were recruited and enrolled from a large Level I trauma hospital and the key stakeholders. Demographic information were collected prior to the individual interview. Focused interviews were conducted virtually using zoom technology. Qualitative data were analyzed using NVivo software and thematic analysis was confirmed across the co-investigators for congruence and applicability to the research questions. RESULTS: Qualitative interviews with 26 key stakeholders provided data to support and integrate a link with gap analysis results on the complex health issue of HAPIs. Specific barrier and recommendation themes identified interventions that could be prioritized. The 52 barrier and 52 recommendation themes/sub-theme(s) respectively were organized by Donabedian (structure, process, and outcome) with structure elements the majority. The top three structure barrier themes involved equipment and standards for use, staff prevention education, and specialized health professionals. The top three structure recommendation themes involved specialized health professionals, equipment and standards for use, and an educational plan for those at risk or with HAPIs. CONCLUSION: The article provides findings from the qualitative portion of a mixed method study related to HAPIs. The qualitative findings associated with the gap analysis quantitative results, achieved the goal of the participatory action research key stakeholders' input into HAPI care and can be replicated internationally. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The benefit of key stakeholder's involvement in solving a clinical problem is sustainability. A quantitative approach and integrating qualitative stakeholders' perspectives provide an in-depth solution that will advance nursing capacity toward health care delivery and HAPI nursing science and policy development on a global level.

Enhanced Skin Assessment Methodology to Detect Early Tissue Damage and Prevent Pressure Injuries.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate a skin assessment technique, subepidermal moisture (SEM) assessment, to assess, identify, and prevent pressure injuries (PIs) in critically ill adults. DESIGN: This was a retrospective, descriptive, comparative research study. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: The sample comprised 69 critically ill adults; their mean age was 58.8 years (SD 18.1 years). The majority were male (n = 40, 58%), 29 (42%) were African American (AA), and 36 (52%) were White. The study setting was a surgical trauma intensive care unit (STICU) in a southern US Gulf Coast academic level I trauma hospital. Data were collected from September to November 2021. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective medical record review of subjects who had undergone SEM assessment. We also collected demographic and pertinent clinical information, including Braden Scale cumulative scores and subscale scores, documented PI prevention interventions, and PI occurrence and characteristics if developed within 7 days of SEM measurement. We also evaluated whether PI prevention interventions were appropriate. To examine nurse perception of the SEM device, we conducted a web-based survey of nurses providing care in our facility's STICU. Comparison of responses was done using Fisher's test or Chi-square test, and the mean responses from groups were compared using t test. RESULTS: Thirty-five (57%) subjects had a sacral SEM delta ≥0.6; 14 (40%) were AA; 20 (57%) were White; and 11 (31%) had a hospital-acquired PI (HAPI) or present-on-admission (POA) PI. Among the 14 HAPI and POA PI subjects with sacral SEM delta, 11 (79%) had sacral SEM delta ≥0.6. Among 26 AA subjects with sacral SEM delta, 5 had a HAPI or POA PI, and of those, 4 (80%) had sacral SEM delta ≥0.6. A significant and negative correlation was observed between cumulative Braden Scale scores on day 2 and sacral SEM delta (r = -0.28, P = .03) and R heel delta (r = -0.29, P = .03) scores, indicating higher PI risk. Of the 35 patients with a sacral SEM delta ≥0.6, 24 (69%) subjects did not have appropriate PI prevention interventions. Nurses (n = 13) indicated that the SEM device was easy to use and helped them perform an accurate skin assessment on patients with darker skin tones. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that SEM technology is beneficial to address racial disparities in skin assessment, enhance skin assessment accuracy beyond existing PI care, improve the accuracy of risk assessment, and promote appropriate location-specific PI prevention interventions.

Evaluation of a Skin Barrier Ring With Assisted Flow: A Prospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of a skin barrier ring with assisted flow in preventing peristomal skin complications (PSCs) in patients with an ileostomy and to evaluate the participants' perceptions of the device. DESIGN: Single-group, prospective cohort study. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: Both inpatients and outpatients with newly created (n = 14) or established (n = 1) ileostomies were recruited from 2 clinical sites in the United States: one was an academic teaching hospital system in the Midwestern United States and the second was a teaching hospital located in the Southeastern United States. METHODS: Participants used the skin barrier ring with assisted flow after receiving education on its use. The pouching system was changed on a routine basis as determined by the ostomy nurse specialist. The Ostomy Skin Tool (OST) was used to assess each participant's peristomal discoloration (D), erosion (E), and tissue overgrowth (T) on admission to the study (baseline) and at final assessment (60 ± 33 days). Secondary outcomes (device handling, comfort, and discretion) were assessed through a questionnaire administered during the final data collection visit. RESULTS: The mean baseline DET score among the 14 participants with a new ileostomy was 2 or less, indicating no PSCs. The incidence of PSCs in this study was 40% (n = 6). Thirteen of 15 participants (86.7%) agreed that the skin barrier ring with assisted flow was easy to apply. Fourteen (93.4%) agreed that the device was comfortable and easy to remove. All 15 participants (100%) agreed it was discreet under clothing. CONCLUSIONS: Sixty percent of participants (n = 9) using the investigational device experienced a PSC. More than 90% of participants agreed that the device was comfortable and easy to remove, and all participants (100%) agreed it was discreet when worn under clothing.

The Standardized Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol (SPIPP) Checklist 2.0: Content validation.

BACKGROUND: Pressure injury prevention is complex, and rates continue to rise. Checklists reduce human error, improve adherence and standardization with complex processes, focus attention on evidence-based practices derived from clinical practice guidelines and are arranged in a systematic manner to manage the entirety of a patient's risk for preventable outcomes. The original Standardized Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol was created to provide a checklist of pressure injury prevention measures but needed revision and validation. PURPOSE: This article describes the revision and content validity testing of the Standardized Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol Checklist 2.0 that took place in 2022. METHODS: Using the International 2019 Clinical Practice Guideline as a foundation, items were identified/revised, and expert review of the items was obtained. The Standardized Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol 2.0 underwent three rounds of revision by experts from the National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel. A panel of eight national experts completed the content validity survey. Individual item content validity index and total scale content validity index were used to summarize the content validity survey scores. RESULTS: The individual item content validity index scores ranged from 0.5 to 1.0. One item (using a mirror to look at heels) was rated as 0.5, three items were 0.75, 20 items were 0.875 and 23 items were 1.0. The item scoring 0.5 was deleted. Those items scoring 0.75 were revised using the content experts' recommendations. The total scale content validity index was 0.93. CONCLUSION: The Standardized Pressure Injury Prevention Protocol 2.0 provides a standardized checklist of evidence-based items that operationalize a rigorous clinical practice guideline for the prevention of pressure injuries. Early intervention using a standardized approach and evidence-based checklist that can be integrated into the workflow of the direct-care nurse and provider provides the best opportunity for successful and sustainable pressure injury prevention.

Best-practices for preventing skin injury beneath personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic: A position paper from the National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel.

COVID-19 has infected millions of patients and impacted healthcare workers worldwide. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) is a key component of protecting frontline clinicians against infection. The benefits of PPE far outweigh the risks, nonetheless, many clinicians are exhibiting skin injury caused by PPE worn incorrectly. These skin injuries, ranging from lesions to open wounds are concerning because they increase the susceptibility of viral infection and transmission to other individuals. Early into the COVID-19 pandemic (April 2020), the U. S. National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel (NPIAP) developed a series of position statements to improve wear-ability of PPE and protect healthcare professionals and their patients as safe from harm as possible under the circumstances. The NPIAP positions, which were formed by conducting a systematic review of what was known at the time, include: (a) Prepare skin before and after wearing PPE with skin sealants, barrier creams and moisturisers; (b) Frequent PPE offloading to relieve pressure and shear applied to skin; (c) treat visible skin injuries immediately caused by PPE to minimise future infection; (d) non-porous dressings may provide additional skin protection, but lack evidence; (e) health systems should take care to educate clinicians about placement and personal hygiene related to handling PPE. Throughout all of these practices, handwashing remains a top priority to handle PPE. These NPIAP positions provided early guidance to reduce the risk of skin injury caused by PPE based on available research regarding PPE injuries, a cautious application of evidence-based recommendations on prevention of device-related pressure injuries in patients and the expert opinion of the NPIAP Board of Directors. Clinicians who adhere to these recommendations reduce the prospects of skin damage and long-term effects (e.g. scarring). These simple steps to minimise the risk of skin injury and reduce the risk of coronavirus infection from PPE can help.

Current Perspectives on Pressure Injuries in Persons with Dark Skin Tones from the National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel.

BACKGROUND: Pressure injury (PI) development is multifactorial. In patients with dark skin tones, identifying impending PIs by visual skin assessment can be especially challenging. The need for improved skin assessment techniques, especially for persons with dark skin tones, continues to increase. Similarly, greater awareness of the need for inclusivity with regard to representation of diverse skin colors/tones in education materials is apparent. OBJECTIVE: To provide current perspectives from the literature surrounding skin assessment and PI development in patients with dark skin tones. METHODS: The following elements will be discussed through the lens of skin tone: (1) historical perspectives of PI staging from the National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel, (2) epidemiology of PI, (3) anatomy and physiology of the skin, (3) skin tone assessment and measurement, (4) augmented visual assessment modalities, (5) PI prevention, (6) PI healing, (7) social determinants of health, and (8) gaps in clinician education. CONCLUSIONS: This article highlights the gap in our clinical knowledge regarding PIs in patients with dark skin tones. Racial disparities with regard to PI development and healing are especially clear among patients with dark skin tones. Skin tone color assessment must be standardized and quantifiable in clinical education, practice, and research. This work is urgently needed, and support from private and governmental agencies is essential.

Effectiveness of an External Urinary Device for Female Anatomy and Trends in Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infections.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of an external female urinary management system (external urinary device for female anatomy [EUDFA]) in critically ill women unable to self-toilet and to identify rates of indwelling catheter use, catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTIs), urinary incontinence (UI), and incontinence-associated dermatitis (IAD) before and after the introduction of the EUDFA. DESIGN: Prospective, observational, and quasi-experimental design. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: The sample comprised 50 adult female patients in 4 critical/progressive care units using an EUDFA at a large academic hospital in the Midwestern United States. All adult patients in these units were included in the aggregate data. METHODS: Prospective data collected from the adult female patients over 7 days included urine diverted from the device to a canister and total leakage. Aggregate unit rates of indwelling catheter use, CAUTIs, UI, and IAD were retrospectively examined during 2016, 2018, and 2019. Means and percentages were compared using t tests or chi-square tests. RESULTS: The EUDFA successfully diverted 85.5% of patients' urine. Indwelling urinary catheter use was significantly lower in 2018 (40.6%) and 2019 (36.6%) compared with 2016 (43.9%) (P < .01). The rate of CAUTIs was lower in 2019 than in 2016, but not significantly (1.34 per 1000 catheter-days vs 0.50, P = .08). The percentage of incontinent patients with IAD was 69.2% in 2016 and 39.5% in 2018-2019 (P = .06). CONCLUSIONS: The EUDFA was effective in diverting urine from critically ill female incontinent patients and indwelling catheter utilization.

Academic-Practice Partnership to Prevent and Manage Pressure Injuries: An Evidence-Based Quality Improvement Initiative.

PURPOSE: This evidence-based quality improvement (EBQI) initiative examined the effect of an academic-practice (A-P) partnership on improvement in quality measures in an acute care setting, specifically hospital-acquired pressure injury (HAPI) prevention and management. DESIGN: A pre-/postdescriptive design was conducted using the practice-informed active learning program to guide the project. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: The EBQI initiative was conducted at a Southern Gulf-Coast university college of nursing and clinical nursing practice leaders at its affiliated 406-bed academic health center/level I trauma center, regional burn center, and comprehensive stroke center. Both institutions are located in the Southeastern United States (Mobile, Alabama). METHODS: The A-P council used a participatory action research approach and developed a practice-informed active learning program incorporating Melnyk's evidence-based practice (EBP) steps, the Donabedian Model and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Stakeholder Engagement in Question Development and Prioritization (SEED). METHOD: Hospital-acquired pressure injuries were selected as the quality outcome to address. To identify HAPI prevention/management evidenced-based practices, the A-P council conducted an integrative literature review and developed a concept map and the Pressure Injury Prevention Gap Analysis Instrument. The gap analysis identified significant gaps between EBP and current pressure injury prevention practices, with priority ranking of gaps for action by key stakeholders. OUTCOME: Following the practice-informed active learning program objectives, the A-P council identified 79 HAPI best EBPs organized by Donabedian domains of structure, process, and outcome and prioritized 3 gaps for action. Actions to address the HAPI gaps included: restructuring the hospital HAPI program, incorporating appropriate leadership to guide the HAPI program, modifying the HAPI reporting process, hiring specialized experts (WOC nurses) with emphasis on pressure injury prevention, establishing a standardized HAPI prevalence survey, improving electronic documentation, increasing transparency of HAPI reporting, improving HAPI accountability at the unit level, and exploring technology to enhance skin assessment. While HAPIs increased by 6.3% from 2019 (n = 104) to 2021 (n = 111), HAPI severity (Stages 3 and 4) decreased by 9.9% from 2019 (n = 14, or 13.46%) to 2021 (n = 4, or 3.6%). IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Our experience with this quality improvement initiative indicates that an A-P partnership can provide a model to address complex clinical problems, quality indicators, and quality improvement while advancing a culture of inquiry and scholarship and building nursing capacity.

An exploration of the perspectives of individuals and their caregivers on pressure ulcer/injury prevention and management to inform the development of a clinical guideline.

BACKGROUND: Consumer engagement is a requirement of high quality clinical guidelines. Developing strategies to engage consumers and incorporate the perspectives of individuals with or at risk of pressure ulcers/injuries and their informal caregivers was one priority in the recent update of the EPUAP/NPIAP/PPPIA's Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers/Injuries: Clinical Practice Guideline. AIMS: The aims were to determine the goals of individuals and caregivers for pressure ulcer/injury care, priorities for pressure ulcer/injury education and biggest problems related to pressure ulcers/injuries. METHODS: An online, anonymous, international 10-item survey, accessible in nine languages was provided to individuals and their caregivers from April to October 2018. Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative data and a thematic analysis approach was used to analyse qualitative data. RESULTS: There were 1233 individuals from 27 countries who completed the survey. Overall, individuals and caregivers had similar goals of care. Reducing the size of pressure ulcer/injury was selected more often as a care goal than complete healing. Individuals, compared to caregivers, considered managing pain more important. Qualitative data analysis identified five themes including knowledge, attitudes, and skills; risk factors for pressure ulcer/injury; accessing pressure ulcer/injury care; quality of life for patients and caregivers; and the pressure ulcer/injury. CONCLUSIONS: The consumer survey provided consumer engagement and perspective that was incorporated into guideline development, including consideration during evaluation of the relevance and acceptability of recommendations, and assignment of recommendation strength ratings.

Ostomy Complications and Quality of Life of Ostomy Support Belt/Garment Wearers: A Web-Based Survey.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine ostomy complications and health-related quality of life (QOL) in individuals with an ostomy who wear an ostomy support belt/garment. DESIGN: A mixed-methods descriptive study. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: Two hundred two community-living adults with an ostomy were recruited using an industry distribution list. The target sample had no geographic restrictions. METHODS: Descriptive analysis was conducted for all outcomes. Participants were separated into groups depending on type of ostomy belt or belt/garment worn or none. All categorical data were summarized using percentages and numerical data using mean ± standard deviation. Association between categorical factors was evaluated using a χ2 test and proportions of occurrences from 2 groups were compared using a 2-proportion z-test. The mean outcomes for 2 or more groups were compared using t tests or analysis of variance (ANOVA), respectively. If ANOVA showed difference among groups, post hoc analysis of group means was conducted using Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test. RESULTS: Two hundred two respondents completed the survey. Of the 174 participants who responded to the survey question on leakage, 157 (90%) reported experiencing leakage and 135 (77.59%) reported rash or skin irritation. Comparison of whether participants had ever experienced a leakage event was not significantly different across groups (P = .3663). Those who wore an ostomy support belt/garment reported leakage less often (less than once a month) versus respondents who wore other types of belts or no belt (n = 49, 73.13% vs n = 53, 59.55%; P = .0388). Of the 174 participants who responded to the peristomal skin question, 135 (77.59%) participants reported peristomal skin complications. Significantly fewer participants who wore an ostomy support belt/garment reported having peristomal skin irritation compared to those who wore other types of belts or no belt (69.01% vs 84.16%; P = .0080). The mean cumulative total City of Hope Quality of Life (COH QOL) Ostomy score for all participants was 6.45 ± 1.36 out of 10, with the psychosocial domain scoring the lowest at 5.67 ± 1.30 out of 10. No significant differences were observed in mean QOL domain and total scores by those who wore an ostomy support belt/garment, other type of belt/garment, and none. When comparing COH QOL mean scores and leakage frequency of more/less once a month, those who reported leakage more often had significantly worse QOL scores in all 4 domains as well as total scores: physical (P = .0008), psychological (P = .0154), social (P = .0056), spiritual (P = .0376), and total COH QOL score (P = .0018). CONCLUSION: This study provides important information related to ostomy complications and QOL associated with wearing an ostomy belt or belt/garment. The use of an ostomy support belt/garment may offer an additional intervention to decrease frequency of leakage and peristomal skin irritation and improve QOL.

Pressure Injury Prevention and Management: A Gap Analysis Using Key Stakeholder Engagement.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine pressure injury prevention and management (PIPM) practices in an academic acute care setting. Specific aims were to (1) develop and examine key stakeholder engagement regarding PIPM practices, (2) develop a valid/reliable gap analysis instrument, and (3) conduct a gap analysis of current PIPM practices. DESIGN: Mixed-methods convergent design and participatory action research. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: A nurse-led council (Council) of key stakeholders from a large academic university healthcare setting was developed. The gap analysis was conducted in a southern gulf coast level I trauma academic acute care hospital in the Southeastern United States. METHODS: A multidisciplinary key stakeholder Council with 27 members was developed to accomplish study aims using the participatory action research approach to train, promote, and foster key stakeholder engagement in all aspects of the research process. The Pressure Injury Prevention Gap Analysis Instrument (PIPGAI) was developed and psychometrically tested. A gap analysis of PIPM practices across a level I trauma academic acute care hospital was conducted using the PIPGAI. RESULTS: The PIPGAI was developed using 2019 Pressure Ulcer/Injury Clinical Practice Guideline recommendations, an integrative literature review/appraisal, a concept map, and Council input. The overall PIPGAI content validity index of 0.95 demonstrated excellent content validity. The individual item content validity index scores ranged from 0.62 to1.0. Low-scoring items (0.62-0.75) were deleted or revised. Interrater reliability was demonstrated by percentage of agreement (62%-79%). Using a modified Delphi approach, items of disagreement were summarized and discussed until 100% consensus was achieved. A gap analysis of PIPM practices was conducted resulting in a cumulative score of 267/553 (48%), indicating gaps in PIPM practices. Fifty (73%) items had content present; 37 of 58 (64%) items had minimal detail, and 36 of 58 (62%) items were difficult or required notable effort to accomplish. Fifty items (63%) had a total score of 4 or less and were identified as a gap (range: 0-7). CONCLUSIONS: The main outcome of this study was an innovative and evidence-based gap analysis process. The study provides (1) a model for key stakeholder engagement, (2) a valid/reliable gap analysis instrument, and (3) a method to evaluate PIPM practices.

Hospital-Acquired Pressure Injuries and Acute Skin Failure in Critical Care: A Case-Control Study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine clinical characteristics and risk factors for critically ill patients who develop pressure injuries and identify the proportion of validated unavoidable pressure injuries associated with the proposed risk factors for acute skin failure (ASF). DESIGN: Retrospective case-control comparative study. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: The sample comprised adult critically ill participants hospitalized in critical care units such as surgical, trauma, cardiovascular surgical, cardiac, neuro, and medical intensive care and corresponding progressive care units in 5 acute care hospitals within a large Midwestern academic/teaching healthcare system. Participants who developed hospital-acquired pressure injuries (HAPIs) and patients without HAPIs (controls) were included. METHODS: A secondary analysis of data from a previous study with HAPIs and matching data for the control sample without HAPIs were obtained from the electronic health record. Descriptive and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted. RESULTS: The sample comprised 475 participants; 165 experienced a HAPI and acted as cases, whereas the remaining 310 acted as controls. Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) mean score (23.8, 8.7%; P < .001), mortality (n = 45, 27.3%; P = .002), history of liver disease (n = 28, 17%; P < .001), and unintentional loss of 10 lb or more in 1 month (n = 20, 12%; P = .002) were higher in the HAPI group. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified participants with respiratory failure (odds ratio [OR] = 3.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-7.08; P = .012), renal failure (OR = 7.48; 95% CI, 3.49-16.01; P < .001), cardiac failure (OR = 4.50; 95% CI, 1.76-11.51; P = .002), severe anemia (OR = 10.89; 95% CI, 3.59-33.00; P < .001), any type of sepsis (OR = 3.15; 95% CI, 1.44-6.90; P = .004), and moisture documentation (OR = 11.89; 95% CI, 5.27-26.81; P <.001) were more likely to develop a HAPI. No differences between unavoidable HAPI, avoidable HAPI, or the control group were identified based on the proposed ASF risk factors. CONCLUSION: This study provides important information regarding avoidable and unavoidable HAPIs and ASF. Key clinical characteristics and risk factors, such as patient acuity, organ failure, tissue perfusion, sepsis, and history of prior pressure injury, are associated with avoidable and unavoidable HAPI development. In addition, we were unable to support a relationship between unavoidable HAPIs and the proposed risk factors for ASF. Unavoidability of HAPIs rests with the documentation of appropriate interventions and not necessarily with the identification of clinical risk factors.

Peristomal Skin Health: A WOCN Society Consensus Conference.

The Wound, Ostomy, and Continence Nurses (WOCN) Society identified the need to define and promote peristomal skin health. A task force was appointed to complete a scoping literature review, to develop evidence-based statements to guide peristomal skin health best practices. Based on the findings of the scoping review, the Society convened a panel of experts to develop evidence- and consensus-based statements to guide care in promoting peristomal skin health. These consensus statements also underwent content validation using a different panel of clinicians having expertise in peristomal skin health. This article reports on the scoping review and subsequent 6 evidenced-based statements, along with the generation and validation of 19 consensus-based statements, to assist clinical decision-making related to promoting peristomal skin health in adults.

Pressure Injury Prevention for Complex Cardiovascular Patients in the Operating Room and Intensive Care Unit: A Quality Improvement Project.

PURPOSE: The purpose of our project was to examine the effect of an alternating pressure (AP) overlay on hospital-acquired pressure injury (HAPI) in high-risk cardiovascular surgical patients. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: This quality improvement (QI) initiative was conducted in a core group of 8 cardiovascular operating room (OR) suites and 1 cardiovascular surgical critical intensive care unit (ICU) in a large Indiana-based academic hospital. The sample comprised adult patients who underwent complex cardiovascular surgical procedures and those in the cardiovascular surgical ICU with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), ventricular assistive device (VAD), and undergoing heart and/or lung transplant, or open chest procedures. APPROACH: The AP overlay was placed on OR cardiovascular foam surfaces and on selected ICU support surfaces for patients who met inclusion criteria. We used a pre/postcomparative QI design to assess outcomes including OR-related HAPI rates, ICU aggregate unit HAPI data, related costs, and staff satisfaction during the 3-month project period. OUTCOMES: Operating room-related HAPIs were reduced from 8/71 (11%) preintervention to 0/147 (0%) postintervention (P = .008), resulting in a cost avoidance of $323,048 and positive staff satisfaction (mean = 3.85; 1- to 4-point Likert scale). No adverse outcomes occurred. Although not significant, ICU HAPI rates decreased from 10 to 7 pre/postintervention (P = .29), demonstrating a 14% HAPI reduction with a cost avoidance of $121,143. The ICU incidence density decreased from 3.57 to 3.24; however, there was no decrease in ICU monthly unit prevalence. Critical care staff satisfaction was positive (mean = 2.95; 1- to 4-point Likert scale) with most staff members preferring the AP overlay to a fluid immersion surface. A cost savings of 48% (AP overlay vs fluid immersion rental) was identified in the ICU. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: We achieved fewer HAPIs and reduced costs and observed positive staff satisfaction, along with no adverse events with the use of the AP overlay. Further research is needed to determine the safety and efficacy of this device for this pressure injury prevention option for immobile patients in both the OR and the ICU.

Pressure ulcer/injury classification today: An international perspective.

There has been an ongoing debate in the healthcare community about what pressure ulcers/injuries are, and how to name, define and classify them. The aim of this discussion paper is to provide a brief theoretical background about pressure ulcer/injury classification, to explain the approach the Guideline Governance Group has taken during the 2019 update of the International Guideline for 'Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers/Injuries' and to share views on how to best implement pressure ulcer/injury classification. First formal pressure ulcer/injury classifications were introduced in the 1950s and today various pressure ulcer/injury classification systems are used worldwide. Dissimilarities between commonly used classification systems may be considered a limitation that impedes clinical and scientific communication. However, the conceptual meaning of pressure ulcer/injury categories described within the various classification systems is comparable and the current evidence does not indicate that one classification is superior to another. Therefore, the Guideline Governance Group created a crosswalk of the major pressure ulcer/injury classifications in common use across different geographic regions. Clinicians are encouraged to use the classification system adopted by their healthcare setting in the most consistent way. The validity of pressure ulcer/injury classification is closely linked to its intended purpose. Studying measurement properties of pressure ulcer/injury classification systems must follow state-of-the-art methods. Structured educational interventions are helpful for improving diagnostic accuracy and reducing misclassification of pressure ulcers/injuries. Implementation of innovative skin and soft tissue assessments and revised pressure ulcer/injury classifications are only worth implementing, when the diagnostic information improves clinical care.

Pressure Injury Prevention and Wound Management for the Patient Who Is Actively Dying: Evidence-Based Recommendations to Guide Care.

Preventing pressure injuries and wound deterioration can be challenging for the patient at the end of life. Pressure injuries are often deemed unavoidable when a patient is actively dying; however, the time frame for this process is variable. As the skin fails in an actively dying patient, interventions should align with the patient and family's goals. This integrative literature review defines essential concepts to pressure injury and wound management during this final stage of life including (1) actively dying, (2) end of life, (3) palliative care, and (4) comfort measures. We also provide clinically relevant, evidence-based recommendations for pressure injury prevention and wound management of the patient who is actively dying.

Lessons Learned About Peristomal Skin Complications: Secondary Analysis of the ADVOCATE Trial.

PURPOSE: The aims of this study were to (1) describe the demographic and clinical characteristics of the individuals with peristomal skin complications (PSCs); (2) describe the PSCs; (3) examine the relationship of PSC occurrence and severity with possible risk factors, and (4) describe how PSCs were managed clinically. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of data from randomized controlled study, the ADVOCATE trial. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: Study participants (n = 153) were divided into 2 groups: those who did not experience a PSC (n = 80) and those who did (n = 73). A participant was considered to have sustained a PSC during the original study if his or her Discoloration, Erosion, and Tissue score increased above the baseline score. METHODS: Demographic and pertinent characteristics of participants with and without PSCs were compared. In addition, data from the 73 participants who sustained PSCs were further analyzed to characterize and describe the PSCs, to investigate potential risk factors associated with the occurrence and severity of a PSC, and for clinical management. Group comparisons were made via t tests for continuous variables, χ test or Fisher exact test for categorical variables, and generalized linear models for identification of risk factors. RESULTS: The majority of the PSCs were mild or moderate in nature, and they were most commonly categorized by the investigators as irritant dermatitis. Two risk factors were associated with an increased likelihood of experiencing a PSC: stoma duration and peristomal skinfold or creases. Within the study period, the odds of sustaining a PSC increased over time and the presence of skinfolds or creases increased the likelihood of PSCs. Peristomal skin complication severity was likely to be worse with an ileostomy and less severe as stoma duration increased. Products used to manage PSCs consisted of barrier rings/seals, skin barrier powder, and paste or paste strips. CONCLUSIONS: Ileostomy is associated with higher risk of a severe PSC and peristomal skin creases or folds. Patient follow-up should be on a structured schedule beyond the first few weeks after surgery because the likelihood of getting a PSC increases over time. This approach may help improve outcomes, particularly for those with an ileostomy and challenging skin contours.

Building Evidence-Based Nursing Practice Capacity in a Large Statewide Health System: A Multimodal Approach.

Integration of evidence-based practice (EBP) into the culture of a healthcare organization is essential to provide safe patient care and promote a thriving culture for the nurses within the healthcare organization. Collaboration and utilization of both clinical and academic experts facilitate the removal of barriers to EBP. This article describes the successful partnership between a healthcare system and school of nursing in executing a 3-phased multimodal approach to an EBP training program.

Prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers/injuries: The protocol for the second update of the international Clinical Practice Guideline 2019.

AIM: The European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, the Pan Pacific Pressure Injury Alliance, and the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel are updating the 'Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers: Clinical Practice Guideline' (CPG) in 2019. The aim of this contribution is to summarize and to discuss the guideline development protocol for the 2019 update. METHODS: A guideline governance group determines and monitors all steps of the CPG development. An international survey of consumers will be undertaken to establish consumer needs and interests. Systematic evidence searches in relevant electronic databases cover the period from July 2013 through August 2018. Risk of bias of included studies will be assessed by two reviewers using established checklists and an overall strength of evidence assigned to the cumulative body of evidence. Small working groups review the evidence available for each topic, review and/or draft the guideline chapters and recommendations and/or good practice statements. Finally, strength of recommendation grades are assigned. The recommendations are rated based on their importance and their potential to improve individual patient outcomes using an international formal consensus process. DISCUSSION: Major methodological advantages of the current revision are a clear distinction between evidence-based recommendations and good practice statements and strong consumer involvement. CONCLUSION: The 2019 guideline update builds on the previous 2014 version to ensure consistency and comparability. Methodology changes will improve the guideline quality to increase clarity and to enhance implementation and compliance. The full guideline development protocol can be accessed from the guideline website (http://www.internationalguideline.com/).