98
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A new pressure ulcer conceptual framework

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aim

          This paper discusses the critical determinants of pressure ulcer development and proposes a new pressure ulcer conceptual framework.

          Background

          Recent work to develop and validate a new evidence-based pressure ulcer risk assessment framework was undertaken. This formed part of a Pressure UlceR Programme Of reSEarch (RP-PG-0407-10056), funded by the National Institute for Health Research. The foundation for the risk assessment component incorporated a systematic review and a consensus study that highlighted the need to propose a new conceptual framework.

          Design

          Discussion Paper.

          Data Sources

          The new conceptual framework links evidence from biomechanical, physiological and epidemiological evidence, through use of data from a systematic review (search conducted March 2010), a consensus study (conducted December 2010–2011) and an international expert group meeting (conducted December 2011).

          Implications for Nursing

          A new pressure ulcer conceptual framework incorporating key physiological and biomechanical components and their impact on internal strains, stresses and damage thresholds is proposed. Direct and key indirect causal factors suggested in a theoretical causal pathway are mapped to the physiological and biomechanical components of the framework. The new proposed conceptual framework provides the basis for understanding the critical determinants of pressure ulcer development and has the potential to influence risk assessment guidance and practice. It could also be used to underpin future research to explore the role of individual risk factors conceptually and operationally.

          Conclusion

          By integrating existing knowledge from epidemiological, physiological and biomechanical evidence, a theoretical causal pathway and new conceptual framework are proposed with potential implications for practice and research.

          Related collections

          Most cited references46

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Patient risk factors for pressure ulcer development: systematic review.

          To identify risk factors independently predictive of pressure ulcer development in adult patient populations? A systematic review of primary research was undertaken, based upon methods recommended for effectiveness questions but adapted to identify observational risk factor studies. Fourteen electronic databases were searched, each from inception until March 2010, with hand searching of specialist journals and conference proceedings; contact with experts and a citation search. There was no language restriction. Abstracts were screened, reviewed against the eligibility criteria, data extracted and quality appraised by at least one reviewer and checked by a second. Where necessary, statistical review was undertaken. We developed an assessment framework and quality classification based upon guidelines for assessing quality and methodological considerations in the analysis, meta-analysis and publication of observational studies. Studies were classified as high, moderate, low and very low quality. Risk factors were categorised into risk factor domains and sub-domains. Evidence tables were generated and a summary narrative synthesis by sub-domain and domain was undertaken. Of 5462 abstracts retrieved, 365 were identified as potentially eligible and 54 fulfilled the eligibility criteria. The 54 studies included 34,449 patients and acute and community patient populations. Seventeen studies were classified as high or moderate quality, whilst 37 studies (68.5%) had inadequate numbers of pressure ulcers and other methodological limitations. Risk factors emerging most frequently as independent predictors of pressure ulcer development included three primary domains of mobility/activity, perfusion (including diabetes) and skin/pressure ulcer status. Skin moisture, age, haematological measures, nutrition and general health status are also important, but did not emerge as frequently as the three main domains. Body temperature and immunity may be important but require further confirmatory research. There is limited evidence that either race or gender is important. Overall there is no single factor which can explain pressure ulcer risk, rather a complex interplay of factors which increase the probability of pressure ulcer development. The review highlights the limitations of over-interpretation of results from individual studies and the benefits of reviewing results from a number of studies to develop a more reliable overall assessment of factors which are important in affecting patient susceptibility. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Impact of pressure ulcers on quality of life in older patients: a systematic review.

            To identify the impact of pressure ulcers (PUs) and PU interventions on health-related quality of life (HRQL). Systematic review and metasynthesis of primary research reporting the impact of PU and PU interventions on HRQL according to direct patient reports. Quality assessment criteria were developed and applied. Data extraction identified findings in the form of direct quotes from patients or questionnaire items and domain results. Combined synthesis of qualitative and quantitative research was performed using content analysis to generate categories and themes from findings. Thirteen electronic databases were searched, and hand searching, cross-referencing, contact with experts, and an online search was undertaken. No language restrictions were applied. Adults with PUs in acute, community, and long-term care settings across Europe, the United States, Asia, and Australia. Thirty-one studies including 2,463 participants with PUs were included in the review. Ages ranged from 17 to 96. The review included 10 qualitative and 21 quantitative studies; 293 findings, 46 categories, and 11 themes emerged. The 11 HRQL themes were physical impact, social impact, psychological effect, PU symptoms, general health, and other impacts of PUs: healthcare professional-client relationships, need for versus effect of interventions, impact on others, financial impact, perceived etiology, and need for knowledge. There is evidence that PUs and PU interventions have a significant impact on HRQL and cause substantial burden to patients.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The cost of pressure ulcers in the UK.

              To estimate the annual cost of treating pressure ulcers in the UK. Costs were derived from a bottom-up methodology, based on the daily resources required to deliver protocols of care reflecting good clinical practice. Health and social care system in the UK. Patients developing a pressure ulcer. A bottom-up costing approach is used to estimate treatment cost per episode of care and per patient for ulcers of different grades and level of complications. Also, total treatment cost to the health and social care system in the UK. The cost of treating a pressure ulcer varies from pound 1,064 (Grade 1) to pound 10,551 (Grade 4). Costs increase with ulcer grade because the time to heal is longer and because the incidence of complications is higher in more severe cases. The total cost in the UK is pound 1.4- pound 2.1 billion annually (4% of total NHS expenditure). Most of this cost is nurse time. Pressure ulcers represent a very significant cost burden in the UK. Without concerted effort this cost is likely to increase in the future as the population ages. To the extent that pressure ulcers are avoidable, pressure damage may be indicative of clinical negligence and there is evidence that litigation could soon become a significant threat to healthcare providers in the UK, as it is in the USA.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Adv Nurs
                J Adv Nurs
                jan
                Journal of Advanced Nursing
                BlackWell Publishing Ltd (Oxford, UK )
                0309-2402
                1365-2648
                October 2014
                31 March 2014
                : 70
                : 10
                : 2222-2234
                Affiliations
                Leeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds UK
                Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds UK
                RM&G officer Mid Yorkshire Hospital NHS Trust UK
                Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust UK
                School of Health & Population Sciences, University of Birmingham UK
                Wound Prevention and Management Service, Leeds Community Healthcare NHS Trust UK
                Columbia University School of Nursing, Columbia University New York, New York, USA
                Department of Family Medicine and Department of Health Services Research, Caphri – School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University the Netherlands
                Adult Health and Illness Department, College of Nursing – Omaha Division, University of Nebraska Medical Center (UNMC) Omaha, Nebraska, USA
                Community Based Health Department, College of Nursing – Omaha Division, University of Nebraska Medical Center (UNMC) Omaha, Nebraska, USA
                Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, Bedford VA Hospital Massachusetts, USA
                Boston University School of Public Health Massachusetts, USA
                Department of Medicine, Tameside Hospital NHS Foundation Trust/University of Manchester UK
                Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust/University of Bradford/NIHR Wound Prevention and Treatment Healthcare Technology Co-operative UK
                IQ Healthcare, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre the Netherlands
                Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southampton UK
                Biomedical Engineering Faculty, Eindhoven University of Technology the Netherlands
                Department of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Tel Aviv University Israel
                Biomedical Engineering Department, Biomedical Engineering Faculty, Eindhoven University of Technology the Netherlands
                School of Healthcare, University of Leeds UK
                Author notes
                Correspondence to S. Coleman:, e-mail: medscole@ 123456leeds.ac.uk
                Article
                10.1111/jan.12405
                4263098
                24684197
                3b6a42fd-cef2-4103-b22d-741713245f7b
                © 2014 The Authors. Journal of Advanced Nursing Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

                History
                : 01 March 2014
                Categories
                Evidence Synthesis

                Nursing
                conceptual framework,nursing,pressure ulcer,risk factors,tissue viability
                Nursing
                conceptual framework, nursing, pressure ulcer, risk factors, tissue viability

                Comments

                Comment on this article