School of Nursing, Midwifery & Paramedicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, Brisbane, Australia.
Nursing Research and Practice Development Centre, The Prince Charles Hospital, Brisbane, Australia.
J Clin Nurs. 2023 Aug;32(15-16):4947-4961. doi: 10.1111/jocn.16687. Epub 2023 Mar 17.
The aim of this study was to analyse prevalence of pressure injury in intensive care versus non-intensive care patients.
Hospital-acquired pressure injury is an enduring problem. Intensive care patients are more susceptible due to multiple risk factors. Several studies have indicated that intensive care patients are more likely than general patients to develop pressure injuries.
Secondary data analysis.
Eighteen general hospitals with intensive care units were included. The sample included all consenting patients. Logistic regression modelling was used to derive prevalence and effect estimates. STROBE reporting guidelines were followed.
The sample comprised 15,678 patients; 611 were in intensive care. The crude prevalence estimate of hospital-acquired pressure injury was 9.6% in intensive care and 2.1% in non-intensive care patients. The ≥Stage II hospital-acquired prevalence estimate in was 8.6% intensive care and 1.2% in non-intensive care patients. Intensive care patients were at markedly increased risk of hospital-acquired pressure injury compared with non-intensive care patients, with risk persisting after adjusting for pressure injury risk score. Risk of ≥ Stage II hospital-acquired pressure injury was further elevated. Intensive care patients had a higher pressure injury risk level and developed a greater proportion of severe hospital-acquired pressure injuries than non-intensive care patients. In intensive care, most hospital-acquired pressure injuries were found on the sacrum/coccyx and heels.
There were significant differences between the hospital-acquired pressure injury prevalence of intensive care versus non-intensive care patients, which is consistent with previous studies. Overall, the prevalence of hospital-acquired pressure injury in intensive care is relatively high, indicating that their prevention should remain a high priority within the intensive care setting.
These results may be used for benchmarking and provide a focus for future education and practice improvement efforts.
Neither patients nor the public were directly involved in the project.
本研究旨在分析重症监护与非重症监护患者的压疮发生率。
医院获得性压疮是一个长期存在的问题。由于存在多种风险因素，重症监护患者更容易受到影响。多项研究表明，重症监护患者比普通患者更容易发生压疮。
二次数据分析。
纳入 18 家设有重症监护病房的综合医院。样本包括所有同意参与的患者。采用逻辑回归模型得出发生率和效应估计值。本研究遵循 STROBE 报告指南。
样本包括 15678 名患者；其中 611 名患者在重症监护病房。重症监护病房的医院获得性压疮发生率为 9.6%，非重症监护病房为 2.1%。重症监护病房的≥Ⅱ期医院获得性压疮发生率为 8.6%，非重症监护病房为 1.2%。与非重症监护病房相比，重症监护病房患者发生医院获得性压疮的风险显著增加，即使在调整压疮风险评分后，这种风险仍然存在。≥Ⅱ期医院获得性压疮的风险进一步增加。重症监护病房患者的压疮风险水平更高，发生严重医院获得性压疮的比例也高于非重症监护病房患者。在重症监护病房，大多数医院获得性压疮发生在骶骨/尾骨和足跟。
重症监护与非重症监护患者的医院获得性压疮发生率存在显著差异，这与以往的研究结果一致。总体而言，重症监护病房的医院获得性压疮发生率相对较高，这表明在重症监护环境中，预防压疮应仍然是重中之重。
这些结果可用于基准比较，并为未来的教育和实践改进工作提供重点。
项目未直接涉及患者或公众。
Zotero 插件