Abstract
Previous studies of the predictive validity of pressure ulcer risk assessment scales using actual patients have encountered many difficulties with potential sources of bias. Examples include the possibility of rapid changes in the patient’s clinical condition, and variations in the quantity and quality of nursing and medical interventions. In an attempt to minimise such potential biases, this replication study employed a high resolution photograph of the patient, together with anonymised information drawn from case notes. The results for the Norton and Waterlow Scores and the Braden Scale, together with judgements made using a visual analogue scale, were determined by a group of clinical nurses, and their findings were then compared with those generated by an expert panel of tissue viability nurses. The results indicated that the nurses’judgement matched expert opinion more closely than results obtained using the scales. Issues surrounding the use of simulation methods in nursing research were discussed in the light of this study.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
