Vowden Kathryn R, Vowden Peter
Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust & University of Bradford, UK.
J Tissue Viability. 2009 Feb;18(1):20-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jtv.2008.11.001. Epub 2008 Dec 20.
The prevalence of pressure ulceration within the population receiving health care in Bradford, UK was 0.74 people with a pressure ulcer per 1000 population (95% CI 0.6-0.8). This prevalence includes a number of tertiary referrals and if these are removed the prevalence falls to 0.71 people with a pressure ulcer per 1000 population. Of the pressure ulcers encountered 195 (53.7%) were classed as grade 2 pressure ulcers with 80 grade 3 wounds and 40 grade 4 pressure ulcers. Forty-eight pressure ulcers were identified as grade 1 wounds but the accuracy of this classification may be in doubt given that 24 apparent grade 1 pressure ulcers were reported to have visible wound beds with common reports of slough and granulation tissue. Severe pressure ulcers differed from less severe partial thickness wounds--grade 3 and 4 pressure ulcers tended to be larger, of longer duration, with greater coverage of the wound bed with necrotic tissue and less granulation and epithelial tissue. Wound exudate was heavier where people presented with severe pressure ulcers while there was a greater probability of wound infection (37.5% of grade 4 pressure ulcers were infected). Given these challenges it was perhaps unsurprising that people with severe pressure ulcers were more likely to have been risk assessed, to have had a critical incident form completed (although only 35% of grade 4 pressure ulcers were identified as having been reported on a critical incident form), to be provided with a powered PR mattress in bed and to be dressed with an antimicrobial dressing. The time to treat each severe pressure ulcer tended to be longer than was the treatment times for less severe wounds. Only 40 people with pressure ulcers (11%) as their most serious wound were located in hospital, suggesting that current pressure ulcer epidemiology and costs may be understated given their reliance on previous hospital based surveys of pressure ulcers. Another potential confounder of pressure ulcer epidemiological studies may be the number of nursing home beds in the surveyed population. On breaking down the Bradford audit data by postcode the pressure ulcer prevalence ranged between 0.13 and 1.39 people with a pressure ulcer per 1000 population with the higher prevalence proportions found in postcodes with large numbers of nursing home beds. It would appear to be prudent to record the number of nursing home beds within community based populations where pressure ulcers (and potentially other wounds) are being recorded.
在英国布拉德福德接受医疗保健的人群中,压疮患病率为每1000人中有0.74人患有压疮(95%置信区间为0.6 - 0.8)。这一患病率包括一些三级转诊病例,如果去除这些病例,患病率降至每1000人中有0.71人患有压疮。在遇到的压疮病例中,195例(53.7%)被归类为2级压疮,80例为3级伤口,40例为4级压疮。48例压疮被确定为1级伤口,但鉴于有24例看似1级的压疮报告显示有可见的伤口床,且常见有腐肉和肉芽组织的报告,这种分类的准确性可能存疑。严重压疮与不太严重的部分厚度伤口不同——3级和4级压疮往往更大,持续时间更长,伤口床被坏死组织覆盖的范围更大,肉芽组织和上皮组织更少。严重压疮患者的伤口渗出物更多,同时伤口感染的可能性更大(4级压疮中有37.5%被感染)。鉴于这些挑战,严重压疮患者更有可能接受风险评估、填写危急事件表格(尽管只有35%的4级压疮被确定已填写在危急事件表格上)、在床上使用动力型减压床垫以及使用抗菌敷料进行包扎,这或许并不令人意外。治疗每个严重压疮的时间往往比治疗不太严重伤口的时间更长。只有40例以压疮为最严重伤口的患者住院,这表明鉴于目前对压疮的流行病学研究和成本依赖于以往基于医院的压疮调查,当前的压疮流行病学情况和成本可能被低估。压疮流行病学研究的另一个潜在混杂因素可能是被调查人群中养老院床位的数量。按邮政编码对布拉德福德的审计数据进行分类后,压疮患病率在每1000人中有0.13至1.39人患有压疮之间,在有大量养老院床位的邮政编码区域中发现的患病率比例更高。在记录压疮(以及可能的其他伤口)的社区人群中记录养老院床位数量似乎是谨慎之举。