Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
International comparison of pressure ulcer measures in long-term care facilities: Assessing the methodological robustness of 4 approaches to point prevalence measurement.
Poldrugovac, Mircha; Padget, Michael; Schoonhoven, Lisette; Thompson, Nicola D; Klazinga, Niek S; Kringos, Dionne S.
Afiliação
  • Poldrugovac M; Amsterdam UMC, Department of Public and Occupational Health, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Meibergdreef 9, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Electronic address: m.poldrugovac@amsterdamumc.nl.
  • Padget M; Independent Research Consultant Paris, France.
  • Schoonhoven L; Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584 CG, Utrecht, the Netherlands; School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Southampton, University Road, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, United Kingdom.
  • Thompson ND; Division of Healthcare Quality Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1600 Clifton Rd, Atlanta, GA, 30333, USA.
  • Klazinga NS; Amsterdam UMC, Department of Public and Occupational Health, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Meibergdreef 9, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
  • Kringos DS; Amsterdam UMC, Department of Public and Occupational Health, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Meibergdreef 9, 1105AZ, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
J Tissue Viability ; 30(4): 517-526, 2021 Nov.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33558099
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

Pressure ulcer indicators are among the most frequently used performance measures in long-term care settings. However, measurement systems vary and there is limited knowledge about the international comparability of different measurement systems. The aim of this analysis was to identify possible avenues for international comparisons of data on pressure ulcer prevalence among residents of long-term care facilities. MATERIAL AND

METHODS:

A descriptive analysis of the four point prevalence measurement systems programs used in 28 countries on three continents was performed. The criteria for the description and analysis were based on the scientific literature on criteria for indicator selection, on issues in international comparisons of data and on specific challenges of pressure ulcer measurements.

RESULTS:

The four measurement systems use a prevalence measure based on very similar numerator and denominator definitions. All four measurement systems also collect data on patient mobility. They differ in the pressure ulcer classifications used and the requirements for a head-to-toe resident examination. The regional or country representativeness of long-term care facilities also varies among the four measurement systems.

CONCLUSIONS:

Methodological differences among the point prevalence measurement systems are an important barrier to reliable comparisons of pressure ulcer prevalence data. The alignment of the methodologies may be improved by implementing changes to the study protocols, such as aligning the classification of pressure ulcers and requirements for a head-to-toe resident skin assessment. The effort required for each change varies. All these elements need to be considered by any initiative to facilitate international comparison and learning.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Úlcera por Pressão Tipo de estudo: Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Úlcera por Pressão Tipo de estudo: Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article