A knowledge test on pressure injury in adult intensive care patients: Development, validation, and item analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pressure injuries are a major problem in critically ill patients, but both students' and intensive care nurses' knowledge about these injuries leaves room for improvement. As no knowledge test is currently available that focuses on pressure injuries in adult intensive care patients, we aimed to develop such tool, establish the content validity, and perform item analysis using Classical test theory. METHODS: Test development followed established multiple-choice question-writing guidelines. Content validation used a Delphi procedure including eight international experts. Item analysis (question difficulty and discrimination power, and quality of the distractors) was based on the test results of a convenience sample who completed the test online, based on ready knowledge. RESULTS: Four Delphi validation rounds resulted in a 24-item multiple-choice test within seven categories: Epidemiology, Aetiology, Prevention, Classification, Risk factors and risk assessment, Wound care, and Skin care. The content validity index was 0.96. The median score of 12 students and 38 qualified nurses was 12.5/24 (interquartile range 11-14.25; range 4-17; 52%). Least correct answers were in the categories Classification and Wound care. Item analysis revealed several knowledge gaps and misconceptions. CONCLUSIONS: The test has excellent content validity. The sample's overall score was low. Item analysis identified various training needs. Future users are recommended to further validate the test and establish its reliability, and to tailor it to their individual context and evaluation requirements.

Pressure injury prevalence and risk factors in Chinese adult intensive care units: A multi-centre prospective point prevalence study.

Despite increasing preventive efforts, pressure injury still occurs in intensive care patients. This study was aimed to describe pressure injury prevalence, risk factors, and prevention practices in adult intensive care patients. This was a multi-centre, one-day, prospective point prevalence study in which a total of 198 intensive care units from 21 provinces in China participated. Overall and ICU-acquired prevalence in intensive care patients were 12.26% and 4.31%, respectively. Consistent with earlier reports, almost half of the ICU-acquired pressure injuries were at stage I, one-fourth were at stage 2, and the most common body sites for pressure injuries were sacral and heel region. Risk factors identified were consistent with prior studies. Repositioning was the most commonly used pressure injury prevention strategy, followed by alternating pressure mattresses/overlays, floating heels, and air-filled mattresses/overlays. These reflect a good level of adherence to recommended international pressure injury prevention clinical practice guidelines. The results provide a baseline reference for overall and ICU-acquired prevalence among adult intensive care patients in China. Future research on what contributed to the lower pressure injury incidence in China needs to be conducted to inform healthcare organisations on their future preventive strategies for pressure injury prevention.

Pressure injury prevalence in Australian intensive care units: A secondary analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pressure injuries (PIs) are an enduring problem for patients in the intensive care unit (ICU) because of their vulnerability and numerous risk factors. METHOD: This study reports Australian data as a subset of data from an international 1-day point prevalence study of ICU-acquired PI in adult patients. Patients aged 18 years or older and admitted to the ICU on the study day were included. The outcome measure was the identification of a PI by direct visual skin assessment on the study day. Data collected included demographic data and clinical risk factors, PI location and stage, and PI prevention strategies used. Descriptive statistics were used to describe PI characteristics, and odds ratios (ORs) were used to identify factors associated with the development of a PI. RESULTS: Data were collected from 288 patients from 16 Australian ICUs. ICU-acquired PI prevalence was 9.7%, with 40 PIs identified on 28 patients. Most PIs were of stage 1 and stage 2 (26/40, 65.0%). Half of the ICU-acquired PIs were found on the head and face. The odds of developing an ICU-acquired PI increased significantly with renal replacement therapy (OR: 4.25, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.49-12.11), impaired mobility (OR: 3.13, 95% CI: 1.08-9.12), fastest respiratory rate (OR: 1.05 [per breath per minute], 95% CI: 1.00-1.10), longer stay in the ICU (OR: 1.04 [per day], 95% CI: 1.01-1.06), and mechanical ventilation on admission (OR: 0.36, CI: 0.14-0.91). CONCLUSION: This study found that Australian ICU-acquired PI prevalence was 9.7% and these PIs were associated with many risk factors. Targeted PI prevention strategies should be incorporated into routine prevention approaches to reduce the burden of PIs in the Australian adult ICU patient population.

Gastric residual volume measurement in the intensive care unit: an international survey reporting nursing practice.

BACKGROUND: Gastric residual volume measurement is routinely used to evaluate the feeding tolerance and gastro-oesophageal reflux in patients receiving enteral feeding therapy in the intensive care unit. However, little supportive evidence for this intervention is available as the usefulness of gastric residual volume measurements in patients receiving enteral feeding therapy in the intensive care is controversial. AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the practice of intensive care unit nurses related to gastric residual volume measurement in patients receiving enteral nutrition. METHODS: A survey was conducted among a sample of intensive care unit nurses (n = 832) from four hospitals in Turkey (n = 182) and attendees of the Annual Congress of the Flemish Society for Critical Care Nurses in Flanders, Belgium (n = 650). The survey instrument was developed by the researchers based on the related literature. RESULTS: A total of 480 nurses completed the questionnaire (response rate = 73%). Gastric residual volume is measured by 98·0% of respondents, with wide variations in the frequency of measuring. A 50-200 mL gastric residual volume is considered problematic by 45·5% (n = 183) of the participants, and only 18·4% (n = 81) reported their practice to be based on a current guideline. Strikingly, more experienced intensive care unit nurses appear to perform gastric residual volume measurements more commonly than their less experienced colleagues (p = 0·004), while the practice is more often reported to be performed in Belgium than in Turkey (p < 0·001). CONCLUSION: Gastric residual volume management could be improved by applying current evidence to daily nursing practice. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Our results show that increased awareness of these guidelines by nurses is needed to reduce inefficient use of working time and resources, streamline clinical practices and improve patient outcomes. Current gastric residual volume measurement guidelines and up-to-date, relevant training should be provided to nurses.

Nurses' knowledge of evidence-based guidelines on the prevention of peripheral venous catheter-related infections: a multicentre survey.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate nurses' knowledge of guidelines for preventing infections associated with peripheral venous catheters. BACKGROUND: Guidelines for the prevention of intravascular catheter-related infections are an important tool to help healthcare professionals minimise the risk of infection. However, they are not always applied by nurses. The literature on this topic is limited, and no study examined this matter for peripheral venous catheters. DESIGN: This cross-sectional study was carried out from November 2011-June 2012. METHODS: The nurses' knowledge of peripheral venous catheter guidelines and its association with gender, experience, education and the ward membership was assessed using a validated questionnaire. RESULTS: Sixteen hospitals from six regions of Italy participated, and 933 questionnaires were collected. Most participants were female (70·1%), undergraduate (51·8%), worked in medical (35·8%) and surgical departments (28·0%), and had >10 years of experience (55·0%). The median score on 10 questions was 6 of 10. A majority of nurses knew it is recommended to replace peripheral venous catheters routinely (90·0%), to perform an aseptic technique during connecting/disconnecting the infusive lines (55·2%), and to replace the administration set <24 hour when lipid emulsions have been infused (88·4%). Of note, 52·6% of nurses advocated the use of steel needles, a potentially dangerous practice. In multivariate analysis, a higher level of education and the area of work were associated with better test scores. CONCLUSION: The sample of nurses' knowledge to some recommendations is frequently low. This could be a potential risk factor for patient safety. The results should sensitise healthcare managers to improve nursing training and education, according to clinical risk management perspectives. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: These data request for more emphasis on international guidelines in infection prevention initiatives.

Epidemiology and risk factors for mortality in critically ill patients with pancreatic infection.

Background: The AbSeS-classification defines specific phenotypes of patients with intra-abdominal infection based on the (1) setting of infection onset (community-acquired, early onset, or late-onset hospital-acquired), (2) presence or absence of either localized or diffuse peritonitis, and (3) severity of disease expression (infection, sepsis, or septic shock). This classification system demonstrated reliable risk stratification in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with intra-abdominal infection. This study aimed to describe the epidemiology of ICU patients with pancreatic infection and assess the relationship between the components of the AbSeS-classification and mortality. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of an international observational study ("AbSeS") investigating ICU patients with intra-abdominal infection. Only patients with pancreatic infection were included in this analysis (n=165). Mortality was defined as ICU mortality within 28 days of observation for patients discharged earlier from the ICU. Relationships with mortality were assessed using logistic regression analysis and reported as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: The overall mortality was 35.2% (n=58). The independent risk factors for mortality included older age (OR=1.03, 95% CI: 1.0 to 1.1 P=0.023), localized peritonitis (OR=4.4, 95% CI: 1.4 to 13.9 P=0.011), and persistent signs of inflammation at day 7 (OR=9.5, 95% CI: 3.8 to 23.9, P<0.001) or after the implementation of additional source control interventions within the first week (OR=4.0, 95% CI: 1.3 to 12.2, P=0.013). Gram-negative bacteria were most frequently isolated (n=58, 49.2%) without clinically relevant differences in microbial etiology between survivors and non-survivors. Conclusions: In pancreatic infection, a challenging source/damage control and ongoing pancreatic inflammation appear to be the strongest contributors to an unfavorable short-term outcome. In this limited series, essentials of the AbSeS-classification, such as the setting of infection onset, diffuse peritonitis, and severity of disease expression, were not associated with an increased mortality risk.ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT03270345.

Is there a place for e-learning in infection prevention?

BACKGROUND: In the last few decades, e-learning, a method which integrates information technology and the learning process by using materials delivered through the internet, has become widely used in educational initiatives for healthcare professionals. PURPOSE: To evaluate whether there is a place for e-learning in the field of infection prevention. METHODS: Non-comprehensive review of the literature. FINDINGS: E-learning courses in the field of infection prevention and control are still scarce, often restricted to local initiatives and not specifically directed toward critical care providers. Although methodological flaws and potential biases hamper the generalizability of results from some currently available studies, findings related to both learners' satisfaction and effectiveness suggest that e-learning might prove an effective educational tool for the (continuing) education of healthcare providers. Further investigations, including research pertaining to the cost-effectiveness of e-learning, are required to provide a better insight in these issues. CONCLUSION: Further research is required to determine the (cost)effectiveness of e-learning in general, and in the field of infection prevention and control in particular. Current insights suggest that e-learning should be based Web 2.0 technologies to address a wide range of learning styles and to optimize interactivity. As a gap in the literature was detected with respect to e-learning modules on infection prevention and control which are specifically oriented toward critical care providers, it can be recommended to promote the development and subsequent assessment of such tools that meet high-quality standards.

Mobile phones as a vector for Healthcare-Associated Infection: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Mobile phones have become indispensable accessories of both our social and professional lives. They increase the quality of healthcare by providing fast communication, and easy access to laboratory results, imaging and patients' files. Simultaneously however, they may act as vectors for potentially pathogenic micro-organisms and as such hold a potential risk for nosocomial infection. OBJECTIVES: To assess the risk of mobile phones as vectors for nosocomial infection and the impact of disinfecting mobile phones on infection risks. METHODS: The MEDLINE and Embase database were searched from January 2000 - January 2019 for a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies of any design were critically appraised by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: We identified 50 studies, of which 12 were interventional. Data for a total of 5425 microbiological samples resulted in a prevalence of potentially pathogenic micro-organisms from 0% to 100%. The 2 most commonly found micro-organisms were coagulase-negative staphylococci (most commonly found in 30 studies) and Staphylococcus aureus (most commonly found in 10 studies). The frequency of microbial growth varied across studies. CONCLUSIONS: The use of mobile phones by healthcare workers without proper disinfection may imply a risk for nosocomial infection. A direct relationship however, remains unproven. Healthcare workers are recommended to include proper handling of mobile phones in their 'classic' hand hygiene routine as proposed by the World Health Organisation.

Heterogeneity hampers the identification of general pressure injury risk factors in intensive care populations: A predictive modelling analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine risk factors for pressure injury in distinct intensive care subpopulations according to admission type (Medical; Surgical elective; Surgery emergency; Trauma/Burns). METHODOLOGY/DESIGN: Predictive modelling using generalised linear mixed models with backward elimination on prospectively gathered data of 13 044 adult intensive care patients. SETTINGS: 1110 intensive care units, 89 countries worldwide. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pressure injury risk factors. RESULTS: A generalised linear mixed model including admission type outperformed a model without admission type (p = 0.004). Admission type Trauma/Burns was not withheld in the model and excluded from further analyses. For the other three admission types (Medical, Surgical elective, and Surgical emergency), backward elimination resulted in distinct prediction models with 23, 17, and 16 predictors, respectively, and five common predictors only. The Area Under the Receiver Operating Curve was 0.79 for Medical admissions; and 0.88 for both the Surgical elective and Surgical emergency models. CONCLUSIONS: Risk factors for pressure injury differ according to whether intensive care patients have been admitted for medical reasons, or elective or emergency surgery. Prediction models for pressure injury should target distinct subpopulations with differing pressure injury risk profiles. Type of intensive care admission is a simple and easily retrievable parameter to distinguish between such subgroups.

International variation in length of stay in intensive care units and the impact of patient-to-nurse ratios.

OBJECTIVE: To assess variation in ICU length of stay between countries with varying patient-to-nurse ratios; to compare ICU length of stay of individual countries against an international benchmark. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of the DecubICUs trial (performed on 15 May 2018). SETTING: The study cohort included 12,794 adult ICU patients (57 countries). Only countries with minimally twenty patients discharged (or deceased) within 30 days of ICU admission were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Multivariate Cox regression was used to evaluate ICU length of stay, censored at 30 days, across countries and for patient-to-nurse ratio, adjusted for sex, age, admission type and Simplified Acute Physiology Score II. The resulting hazard ratios for countries, indicating longer or shorter length of stay than average, were plotted on a forest plot. Results by country were benchmarked against the overall length of stay using Kaplan-Meier curves. RESULTS: Patients had a median ICU length of stay of 11 days (interquartile range, 4-27). Hazard ratio by country ranged from minimally 0.42 (95% confidence interval 0.35-0.51) for Greece, to maximaly1.94 (1.28-2.93) for Lithuania. The hazard ratio for patient-to-nurse was 0.96 (0.94-0.98), indicating that higher patient-to-nurse ratio results in longer length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Despite adjustment for case-mix, we observed significant heterogeneity of ICU length of stay in-between countries, and a significantly longer length of stay when patient-to-nurse ratio increases. Future studies determining underlying characteristics of individual ICUs and broader organisation of healthcare infrastructure within countries may further explain the observed heterogeneity in ICU length of stay.

Prevalence of skin pressure injury in critical care patients in the UK: results of a single-day point prevalence evaluation in adult critically ill patients.

OBJECTIVES: Hospital-acquired pressure injuries (PIs) are a source of morbidity and mortality, and many are potentially preventable. DESIGN: This study prospectively evaluated the prevalence and the associated factors of PIs in adult critical care patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) in the UK. SETTING: This service evaluation was part of a larger, international, single-day point prevalence study of PIs in adult ICU patients. Training was provided to healthcare givers using an electronic platform to ensure standardised recognition and staging of PIs across all sites. PARTICIPANTS: The characteristics of the ICUs were recorded before the survey; deidentified patient data were collected using a case report form and uploaded onto a secure online platform. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Factors associated with ICU-acquired PIs in the UK were analysed descriptively and using mixed multiple logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Data from 1312 adult patients admitted to 94 UK ICUs were collected. The proportion of individuals with at least one PI was 16% (211 out of 1312 patients), of whom 8.8% (n=115/1312) acquired one or more PIs in the ICU and 7.3% (n=96/1312) prior to ICU admission. The total number of PIs was 311, of which 148 (47.6%) were acquired in the ICU. The location of majority of these PIs was the sacral area, followed by the heels. Braden score and prior length of ICU stay were associated with PI development. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence and the stage of severity of PIs were generally low in adult critically ill patients admitted to participating UK ICUs during the study period. However, PIs are a problem in an important minority of patients. Lower Braden score and longer length of ICU stay were associated with the development of injuries; most ICUs assess risk using tools which do not account for this. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03270345.

Epidemiology and outcome of pressure injuries in critically ill patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A propensity score adjusted analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pressure injuries are a frequent complication in intensive care unit (ICU) patients, especially in those with comorbid conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Yet no epidemiological data on pressure injuries in critically ill COPD patients are available. OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of ICU-acquired pressure injuries in critically ill COPD patients and to investigate associations between COPD status, presence of ICU-acquired pressure injury, and mortality. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of prospectively collected data from DecubICUs, a multinational one-day point-prevalence study of pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. We generated a propensity score summarizing risk for COPD and ICU-acquired pressure injury. The propensity score was used as matching criterion (1:1-ratio) to assess the proportion of ICU-acquired pressure injury attributable to COPD. The propensity score was then used in regression modeling assessing the association of COPD with risk of ICU-acquired pressure injury, and examining variables associated with mortality (Cox proportional-hazard regression). RESULTS: Of the 13,254 patients recruited to DecubICUs, 1663 (12.5%) had documented COPD. ICU-acquired pressure injury prevalence was higher in COPD patients: 22.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 20.2 to 24.2) vs. 15.3% (95% CI 14.7 to 16.0). COPD was independently associated with developing ICU-acquired pressure injury (odds ratio 1.40, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.61); the proportion attributable to COPD was 6.4% (95% CI 5.2 to 7.6). Compared with non-COPD patients without pressure injury, mortality was no different among patients without COPD but with pressure injury (hazard ratio [HR] 1.07, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.17) or COPD patients without pressure injury (HR 1.13, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.27). Mortality was higher among COPD patients with pressure injury (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.58). CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Critically ill COPD patients have a statistically significant higher risk of pressure injury. Moreover, those that develop pressure injury are at higher risk of mortality. As such, pressure injury may serve as a surrogate for poor prognostic status to help clinicians identify patients at high risk of death. Also, delivery of interventions to prevent pressure injury are paramount in critically ill COPD patients. Further studies should determine if early intervention in critically ill COPD patients can modify development of pressure injury and improve prognosis.

Poor timing and failure of source control are risk factors for mortality in critically ill patients with secondary peritonitis.

PURPOSE: To describe data on epidemiology, microbiology, clinical characteristics and outcome of adult patients admitted in the intensive care unit (ICU) with secondary peritonitis, with special emphasis on antimicrobial therapy and source control. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of a multicenter observational study (Abdominal Sepsis Study, AbSeS) including 2621 adult ICU patients with intra-abdominal infection in 306 ICUs from 42 countries. Time-till-source control intervention was calculated as from time of diagnosis and classified into 'emergency' (< 2 h), 'urgent' (2-6 h), and 'delayed' (> 6 h). Relationships were assessed by logistic regression analysis and reported as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: The cohort included 1077 cases of microbiologically confirmed secondary peritonitis. Mortality was 29.7%. The rate of appropriate empiric therapy showed no difference between survivors and non-survivors (66.4% vs. 61.3%, p = 0.1). A stepwise increase in mortality was observed with increasing Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores (19.6% for a value ≤ 4-55.4% for a value > 12, p < 0.001). The highest odds of death were associated with septic shock (OR 3.08 [1.42-7.00]), late-onset hospital-acquired peritonitis (OR 1.71 [1.16-2.52]) and failed source control evidenced by persistent inflammation at day 7 (OR 5.71 [3.99-8.18]). Compared with 'emergency' source control intervention (< 2 h of diagnosis), 'urgent' source control was the only modifiable covariate associated with lower odds of mortality (OR 0.50 [0.34-0.73]). CONCLUSION: 'Urgent' and successful source control was associated with improved odds of survival. Appropriateness of empirical antimicrobial treatment did not significantly affect survival suggesting that source control is more determinative for outcome.

Epidemiology and age-related mortality in critically ill patients with intra-abdominal infection or sepsis: an international cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe epidemiology and age-related mortality in critically ill older adults with intra-abdominal infection. METHODS: A secondary analysis was undertaken of a prospective, multi-national, observational study (Abdominal Sepsis Study, ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT03270345) including patients with intra-abdominal infection from 309 intensive care units (ICUs) in 42 countries between January and December 2016. Mortality was considered as ICU mortality, with a minimum of 28 days of observation when patients were discharged earlier. Relationships with mortality were assessed by logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The cohort included 2337 patients. Four age groups were defined: middle-aged patients [reference category; 40-59 years; n=659 (28.2%)], young-old patients [60-69 years; n=622 (26.6%)], middle-old patients [70-79 years; n=667 (28.5%)] and very old patients [≥80 years; n=389 (16.6%)]. Secondary peritonitis was the predominant infection (68.7%) and was equally prevalent across age groups. Mortality increased with age: 20.9% in middle-aged patients, 30.5% in young-old patients, 31.2% in middle-old patients, and 44.7% in very old patients (P<0.001). Compared with middle-aged patients, young-old age [odds ratio (OR) 1.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21-2.17], middle-old age (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.35-2.41) and very old age (OR 3.69, 95% CI 2.66-5.12) were independently associated with mortality. Other independent risk factors for mortality included late-onset hospital-acquired intra-abdominal infection, diffuse peritonitis, sepsis/septic shock, source control failure, liver disease, congestive heart failure, diabetes and malnutrition. CONCLUSIONS: For ICU patients with intra-abdominal infection, age >60 years was associated with mortality; patients aged ≥80 years had the worst prognosis. Comorbidities and overall disease severity further compromised survival. As all of these factors are non-modifiable, it remains unclear how to improve outcomes.

Nursing considerations to complement the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines.

OBJECTIVES: To provide a series of recommendations based on the best available evidence to guide clinicians providing nursing care to patients with severe sepsis. DESIGN: Modified Delphi method involving international experts and key individuals in subgroup work and electronic-based discussion among the entire group to achieve consensus. METHODS: We used the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines as a framework to inform the structure and content of these guidelines. We used the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to rate the quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations, with grade 1 indicating clear benefit in the septic population and grade 2 indicating less confidence in the benefits in the septic population. In areas without complete agreement between all authors, a process of electronic discussion of all evidence was undertaken until consensus was reached. This process was conducted independently of any funding. RESULTS: Sixty-three recommendations relating to the nursing care of severe sepsis patients are made. Prevention recommendations relate to education, accountability, surveillance of nosocomial infections, hand hygiene, and prevention of respiratory, central line-related, surgical site, and urinary tract infections, whereas infection management recommendations related to both control of the infection source and transmission-based precautions. Recommendations related to initial resuscitation include improved recognition of the deteriorating patient, diagnosis of severe sepsis, seeking further assistance, and initiating early resuscitation measures. Important elements of hemodynamic support relate to improving both tissue oxygenation and macrocirculation. Recommendations related to supportive nursing care incorporate aspects of nutrition, mouth and eye care, and pressure ulcer prevention and management. Pediatric recommendations relate to the use of antibiotics, steroids, vasopressors and inotropes, fluid resuscitation, sedation and analgesia, and the role of therapeutic end points. CONCLUSION: Consensus was reached regarding many aspects of nursing care of the severe sepsis patient. Despite this, there is an urgent need for further evidence to better inform this area of critical care.

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study.

PURPOSE: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. METHODS: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. RESULTS: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9-27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6-16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score < 19, ICU stay > 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2-1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4-1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3-3.3). CONCLUSION: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat.

Prevention of nosocomial infections in intensive care patients.

BACKGROUND: Changes in patient profile, and in the health care environment, altering socioeconomic conditions and advances in science and information technology challenge the nursing profession, in particular intensive care nursing. All these changes will undoubtedly affect the way we will practice in the (near) future. A comprehensive understanding of these factors is therefore essential if nursing is to meet the challenges presented by tomorrow's critical care environment. Precisely because of the often expensive high-tech evolutions that have occurred at a rapid pace and are to be further expected, a continued focus on the basics of nursing, the core role of care, as well as maintaining confidence in the capacity to deliver safe, high-quality, and evidence-based patient care will increasingly be a challenge to critical care nurses. In particular, basic nursing skills and knowledge remain a key prerequisite in the prevention of nosocomial infections, which is a continuing major complication and threat to intensive care unit patients. However, critical care nurses' knowledge about the evidence-based consensus recommendations for infection prevention and control has been found to be rather poor. It has nevertheless been demonstrated that a meticulous implementation of such preventive bundles may result in significantly better patient and process outcomes. Moreover, many preventive strategies are considered to be easy to implement and inexpensive. As such, a first and critical step should be to increase critical care nurses' adherence to the recommendations of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. AIM: In this article, an up-to-date assessment of evidence-based recommendations for the prevention of nosocomial infections, with special focus on catheter-related bloodstream infections and strategies relevant for nurses working in critical care environments, will be provided. Additionally, we will detail on a number of approaches advocated to translate the internationally accepted consensus recommendations to the needs and expectations of critical care nurses, and to consequently enhance the likelihood of successful implementation and adherence. These steps will help critical care nurses in their striving towards excellence in their profession. SUMMARY: Intensive care nurses can make a significant contribution in preventing nosocomial infections by assuming full responsibility for quality improvement measures such as evidence-based infection prevention and control protocols. However, as general knowledge of the preventive measures has been shown to be rather poor, nurses' education should include supplementary support from evidence-based recommendations.

Nurses' knowledge of evidence-based guidelines for the prevention of surgical site infection.

BACKGROUND: Prevention of surgical site infection (SSI) is an important responsibility for nurses. Knowledge of the related evidence-based recommendations is necessary to provide high-quality nursing care. AIM: Development of an evaluation tool and subsequent evaluation of intensive care unit (ICU) nurses' knowledge of the SSI prevention guideline to identify their specific educational needs, as part of a needs analysis preceding the development of an e-learning module on infection prevention. METHODS: We developed a multiple-choice knowledge test concerning evidence-based SSI prevention. After expert assessment of its face and content validity, the test was used in a survey among 809 ICU nurses. Demographics included were gender, ICU experience, number of ICU beds, and whether respondents had obtained a specialized ICU qualification. Based on the test results, an item analysis was performed. RESULTS: Face and content validity were achieved for 9 out of 10 items of the questionnaire. From the survey, we collected 650 questionnaires (response rate 80.3%). The item analysis revealed overall good results with values for item difficulty ranging from 0.1 to 0.5 for eight questions, while one question had a value of 0.02; discriminative values ranging from 0.27 to 0.53 and values for the quality of the response alternatives between 0.1 and 0.7. Overall, these results demonstrate the questionnaire's reliability. The nurses' mean score on the knowledge test was 29%. Males were shown to have better scores. CONCLUSIONS: Opportunities exist to improve ICU nurses' knowledge about SSI prevention recommendations. Current guidelines should support their ongoing training and education.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines for preventing central venous catheter-related infection: results of a knowledge test among 3405 European intensive care nurses.

OBJECTIVE: To determine European intensive care unit (ICU) nurses' knowledge of guidelines for preventing central venous catheter-related infection from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. DESIGN: Multicountry survey (October 2006-March 2007). SETTING: Twenty-two European countries. PARTICIPANTS: ICU nurses. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Using a validated multiple-choice test, knowledge of ten recommendations for central venous catheter-related infection prevention was evaluated (one point per question) and assessed in relation to participants' gender, ICU experience, number of ICU beds, and acquisition of a specialized ICU qualification. We collected 3405 questionnaires (70.9% response rate); mean test score was 44.4%. Fifty-six percent knew that central venous catheters should be replaced on indication only, and 74% knew this also concerns replacement over a guidewire. Replacing pressure transducers and tubing every 4 days, and using coated devices in patients requiring a central venous catheter >5 days in settings with high infection rates only were recognized as recommended by 53% and 31%, respectively. Central venous catheters dressings in general are known to be changed on indication and at least once weekly by 43%, and 26% recognized that both polyurethane and gauze dressings are recommended. Only 14% checked 2% aqueous chlorhexidine as the recommended disinfection solution; 30% knew antibiotic ointments are not recommended because they trigger resistance. Replacing administration sets within 24 hrs after administering lipid emulsions was recognized as recommended by 90%, but only 26% knew sets should be replaced every 96 hrs when administering neither lipid emulsions nor blood products. Professional seniority and number of ICU beds showed to be independently associated with better test scores. CONCLUSIONS: Opportunities exist to optimize knowledge of central venous catheter-related infection prevention among European ICU nurses. We recommend including central venous catheter-related infection prevention guidelines in educational curricula and continuing refresher education programs.