Skin and wound care survey: 2019 results.

ABSTRACT: This article presents the 2019 Skin and Wound Survey results, which could assist in identifying gaps in nurses' skin and wound care knowledge and in developing nursing curricula and continuing professional development. The 2019 survey was conducted before the COVID-19 pandemic, and the results are compared with those from surveys conducted in 2004 and 2012. Author commentaries and additional input from the survey participants are also provided.

Development and psychometric property testing of a skin tear knowledge assessment instrument (OASES) in 37 countries.

AIM: To develop and psychometrically evaluate a skin tear knowledge assessment instrument (OASES). DESIGN: Prospective psychometric instrument validation study. METHOD: The skin tear knowledge assessment instrument was developed based on a literature review and expert input (N = 19). Face and content validity were assessed in a two-round Delphi procedure by 10 international experts affiliated with the International Skin Tear Advisory Panel (ISTAP). The instrument was psychometrically tested in a convenience sample of 387 nurses in 37 countries (April-May 2020). Validity of the multiple-choice test items (item difficulty, discriminating index, quality of the response alternatives), construct validity, and test-retest reliability (stability) were analysed and evaluated in light of international reference standards. RESULTS: A 20-item instrument, covering six knowledge domains most relevant to skin tears, was designed. Content validity was established (CVI = 0.90-1.00). Item difficulty varied between 0.24 and 0.94 and the quality of the response alternatives between 0.01-0.52. The discriminating index was acceptable (0.19-0.77). Participants with a theoretically expected higher knowledge level had a significantly higher total score than participants with theoretically expected lower knowledge (p < .001). The 1-week test-retest intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.83 (95% CI = 0.78-0.86) for the full instrument and varied between 0.72 (95% CI = 0.64-0.79) and 0.85 (95% CI = 0.81-0.89) for the domains. Cohen's Kappa coefficients of the individual items ranged between 0.21 and 0.74. CONCLUSION: The skin tear knowledge assessment instrument is supported by acceptable psychometric properties and can be applied in nursing education, research, and practice to assess knowledge of healthcare professionals about skin tears. IMPACT: Prevention and treatment of skin tears are a challenge for healthcare professionals. The provision of adequate care is based on profound and up-to-date knowledge. None of the existing instruments to assess skin tear knowledge is psychometrically tested, nor up-to-date. OASES can be used worldwide to identify education, practice, and research needs and priorities related to skin tears in clinical practice.

ISTAP classification for skin tears: Validation for Brazilian Portuguese.

The objective of this study was to evaluate interobserver reliability and the concurrent criterion validity of the adapted version of the International Skin Tear Advisory Panel (ISTAP) Skin Tear Classification System to Brazilian Portuguese. For the evaluation of interobserver reliability using the photograph database, 36 nurses classified 30 skin tears (STs) into three groups, according to its definitions (adapted version). For the evaluation through clinical application, 23 nurses classified 12 STs present in 8 thoracic and cardiovascular postoperative patients at a tertiary hospital in Sao Paulo, Brazil. For the data collection of patients, an enterostomal therapist nurse classified the ST found by simultaneously using the adapted ISTAP version and the Skin Tear Audit Research (STAR) Classification System to test the concurrent criterion validity. The average of 17.83 correct answers (SD = 5.03) resulted from 1080 photograph observations, with Fleiss κ = 0.279 (reasonable concordance level). The interobserver reliability in the clinical application resulted in a global correct answer percentage of 76.7% in 85 observations. The concurrent criterion validity was attested by the total correlation (r = 1) between ISTAP and STAR. The ISTAP classification for ST is a reliable instrument and also valid in Brazil, making it another option to be used in clinical practice.

CE: Preventing, Assessing, and Managing Skin Tears: A Clinical Review.

: Although skin tears are common, particularly among older adults and neonates, they are often inadequately documented and poorly managed, resulting in complications, extended hospital stays, and negative patient outcomes. In this article, the first in a series on wound care in collaboration with the World Council of Enterostomal Therapists (www.wcetn.org), the authors describe the complications that developed in an elderly patient whose skin tear was improperly dressed and discuss best practices for preventing, assessing, documenting, and managing skin tears.

The Art of Dressing Selection: A Consensus Statement on Skin Tears and Best Practice.

PURPOSE: To provide information about product selection for the management of skin tears. TARGET AUDIENCE: This continuing education activity is intended for physicians and nurses with an interest in skin and wound care. OBJECTIVES: After participating in this educational activity, the participant should be better able to:1. Explain skin tear (ST) risk factors and assessment guidelines.2. Identify best practice treatments for STs, including the appropriate dressings for each ST type. ABSTRACT: To aid healthcare professionals in product selection specific for skin tears, the International Skin Tear Advisory Panel conducted a systematic literature review and 3-phase Delphi consensus with a panel of international reviewers to provide the best available evidence for product selection related to the treatment of skin tears.

2014 survey results: wound care and prevention.

The results of the 2012 Wound Care Survey are presented. A total of 647 nurses participated in this follow-up to the 2005 survey conducted by the authors.

A descriptive cross-sectional international study to explore current practices in the assessment, prevention and treatment of skin tears.

This study presents the results of a descriptive, cross-sectional, online international survey in order to explore current practices in the assessment, prediction, prevention and treatment of skin tears (STs). A total of 1127 health care providers (HCP) from 16 countries completed the survey. The majority of the respondents (69·6%, n = 695) reported problems with the current methods for the assessment and documentation of STs with an overwhelming majority (89·5%, n = 891) favouring the development of a simplified method of assessment. Respondents ranked equipment injury during patient transfer and falls as the main causes of STs. The majority of the samples indicated that they used non-adhesive dressings (35·89%, n = 322) to treat a ST, with the use of protective clothing being the most common method of prevention. The results of this study led to the establishment of a consensus document, classification system and a tool kit for use by practitioners. The authors believe that this survey was an important first step in raising the global awareness of STs and to stimulate discussion and research of these complex acute wounds.

International Skin Tear Advisory Panel: a tool kit to aid in the prevention, assessment, and treatment of skin tears using a Simplified Classification System ©.

PURPOSE: To enhance the learner's competence with knowledge regarding utilization of a tool kit to aid in the prevention, assessment, and treatment of skin tears. TARGET AUDIENCE: This continuing education activity is intended for physicians and nurses with an interest in skin and wound care. OBJECTIVES: After participating in this educational activity, the participant should be better able to:1. Demonstrate knowledge of skin tear prevention and classification as presented in the International Skin Tear Advisory Panel's tool kit.2. Apply information from the skin tear tool kit to patient care scenarios. ABSTRACT: The International Skin Tear Advisory Panel has created a tool kit for the prevention, identification, and treatment of skin tears. The tool kit is based on extensive literature reviews, international input from healthcare professionals, and on expert opinion. It has undergone a modified Delphi process.

Validation of a new classification system for skin tears.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to validate and establish reliability of the International Skin Tear classification system. METHOD: A consensus panel of 12 internationally recognized key opinion leaders convened in 2011 to establish consensus statements on the prevention, prediction, assessment, and treatment of skin tears. Subsequently, a new skin tear classification system was proposed. The system was then tested for interrater and intrarater reliability between the experts before being tested more widely on a sample of 327 individuals from the United States, Canada, and Europe. RESULTS: The results of the study indicated a substantial level of agreement for the expert panel (Fleiss κ = 0.619; 2-month follow-up = 0.653). Intrarater reliability was high (Cohen κ = 0.877). Interrater reliability was moderate (Fleiss κ = 0.555) for healthcare professionals (n = 303) and fair for non-health professionals (Fleiss κ = 0.338; n = 24). CONCLUSIONS: This international study established the reliability and validity of a new classification system for skin tears.

Wound dressings: an evolving art and science.

Keeping abreast of the numerous wound dressings available for patient care is an ambitious task. Being able to differentiate among the various treatment options, when and how to apply them, in what combinations, and when to change them has become a challenge for all healthcare practitioners.

Skin tears: state of the science: consensus statements for the prevention, prediction, assessment, and treatment of skin tears©.

The appropriate management of patients with skin tears is an ongoing challenge for healthcare professionals. Skins tears are often painful, acute wounds resulting from trauma to the skin and are largely preventable. Healthcare professionals must be able to identify individuals at risk for skin tears and aid in the prevention of these wounds and in their treatment when they occur. Despite preliminary studies that suggest skin tears may be more prevalent than pressure ulcers, there remains a paucity of literature to guide prevention, assessment, and treatment of skin tears. As a result, these wounds are often mismanaged and misdiagnosed, leading to complications, including pain, infection, and delayed wound healing. In addition, skin tears increase caregiver time and facility costs, cause anxiety for patients and families, and may reflect poorly on the quality of care delivered in a facility. In an effort to shift awareness toward this largely unheeded healthcare issue, a consensus panel of 13 internationally recognized key opinion leaders convened to establish consensus statements on the prevention, prediction, assessment, and treatment of skin tears. The initial consensus panel meeting was held in January 2011 and was made possible by an unrestricted educational grant from Hollister Wound Care. This document details the consensus definition and statements, as well as recommendations for future research and steps toward establishing a validated, comprehensive program for managing skin tears.