Latimer Sharon, Walker Rachel M, Hewitt Jayne, Ray-Barruel Gillian, Shaw Joanie, Hunt Tracey, Gillespie Brigid M
School of Nursing and Midwifery, and NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Wiser Wounds Care, Griffith University, Southport, QLD, Australia.
College of Healthcare Sciences Academy, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia.
BMC Palliat Care. 2025 Jul 29;24(1):216. doi: 10.1186/s12904-025-01853-9.
Some dying individuals can develop skin injuries at the end-of-life (EOL) due to factors associated with the disease processes, aging or both. These EOL wounds, which include Kennedy terminal ulcers, Trombley-Brennan terminal tissue injuries, Skin Changes at Life's End and end-stage skin failure, have distinguishing features. Yet, they can appear similar to pressure injuries (PIs), making assessment difficult. Compounding this was the lack of clinical assessment tool for EOL wounds. In 2022, we conducted a modified Delphi panel to develop a new EOL wound assessment tool for use in dying adults and established the face and content validity of the items. The new tool does not differentiate between a PI and EOL wound; rather, it aids clinicians' assessment of EOL wound characteristics and suggests the development of a multidisciplinary management plan. The next step in the tool development is to determine its reliability. The aim of this study was to test the study protocol and interrater reliability of a new EOL wound assessment tool.
This feasibility study was conducted in dying hospitalised adult patients admitted to medical and palliative care units at three hospitals across southeast Queensland, Australia. We gathered quantitative data according to the study protocol including participant screening, recruitment, consent, data collection and interrater reliability. Our four research assistants (RAs) and an independent blinded outcome assessor were trained in the study protocol and use of the new EOL wound assessment tool. Using a pragmatic approach, patients with a new reported PI were screened for study eligibility. For recruited participants, clinical data, skin blanching, and a deidentified wound photograph were first collected. Next, the RAs used the new tool to assess the patient and the skin to determine the presence of an EOL wound (Yes/No). An off-site independent blinded outcome assessor accessed the participant research data and, using the new tool, undertook the same assessment as the RA. Frequencies and percentages were computed for the feasibility outcomes. Cohen's kappa statistic was calculated to determine the interrater reliability agreement.
Over 20 months, 140 patients were screened, with 23 (16.4%) eligible for recruitment, exceeding our ≥ 10% target. Ten (43.5%) participants were recruited, which fell short of our ≥ 50% target, with study refusal and imminent death the reasons for non-recruitment. Among the 10 recruited study participants, 13 wounds were observed on the sacrum, coccyx, and lower extremities. The interrater reliability between the two assessors was moderate (n = 8/13; 61.5%), with disagreement on five wounds, all located on the heels and toes.
Assessing for EOL wounds in dying patients is a clinical imperative. With minor study protocol adjustments, such as having two clinicians concurrently undertake independent wound assessment and only recruiting from palliative care units, conducting a larger multisite study testing the inter- and intrarater reliability of the new EOL wound assessment tool is feasible.
一些临终患者可能会因疾病进程、衰老或两者相关的因素在生命末期(EOL)出现皮肤损伤。这些临终伤口,包括肯尼迪末期溃疡、特伦布利 - 布伦南末期组织损伤、生命末期皮肤变化和终末期皮肤衰竭,具有显著特征。然而,它们可能与压力性损伤(PI)相似,导致评估困难。此外,缺乏针对临终伤口的临床评估工具。2022年,我们进行了一次改良的德尔菲专家小组会议,以开发一种用于临终成年人的新型临终伤口评估工具,并确定了这些条目的表面效度和内容效度。新工具并不区分压力性损伤和临终伤口;相反,它有助于临床医生评估临终伤口的特征,并建议制定多学科管理计划。该工具开发的下一步是确定其可靠性。本研究的目的是测试一种新型临终伤口评估工具的研究方案和评估者间信度。
本可行性研究在澳大利亚昆士兰东南部三家医院的内科和姑息治疗病房收治的临终住院成年患者中进行。我们根据研究方案收集定量数据,包括参与者筛选、招募、同意、数据收集和评估者间信度。我们的四名研究助理(RA)和一名独立的盲法结果评估者接受了研究方案和新型临终伤口评估工具使用的培训。采用务实的方法,对新报告有压力性损伤的患者进行研究资格筛选。对于招募的参与者,首先收集临床数据、皮肤变白情况和一张去识别化的伤口照片。接下来,研究助理使用新工具评估患者和皮肤,以确定是否存在临终伤口(是/否)。一名异地独立盲法结果评估者访问参与者的研究数据,并使用新工具进行与研究助理相同的评估。计算可行性结果的频率和百分比。计算科恩kappa统计量以确定评估者间信度一致性。
在20个月的时间里,共筛选了140名患者,其中23名(16.4%)符合招募条件,超过了我们≥10%的目标。招募了10名(43.5%)参与者,未达到我们≥50%的目标,未招募的原因是研究拒绝和即将死亡。在10名招募的研究参与者中,在骶骨、尾骨和下肢观察到13处伤口。两名评估者之间的评估者间信度为中等(n = 8/13;61.5%),有5处伤口存在分歧,均位于脚跟和脚趾。
评估临终患者的临终伤口是一项临床要务。通过对研究方案进行一些小的调整,例如让两名临床医生同时进行独立的伤口评估,并且仅从姑息治疗病房招募患者,开展一项更大规模的多中心研究来测试新型临终伤口评估工具的评估者间和评估者内信度是可行的。