Improving pressure ulcer risk assessment and management using the Waterlow scale at a London teaching hospital.

Abstract

Pressure ulcers (PUs) cost the National Health Service (NHS) up to 4% of its health care expenditure. Arising from this are also clinical negligence claims, where inadequate risk assessment has been cited as one of the principal drawbacks in the prevention of PUs. This two-cycle audit aims to examine the consistency and accuracy of risk assessment of patients, and demonstrates how simple focused interventions can improve the quality of care provided. The Waterlow pressure ulcer risk assessment tool was employed to assess inpatients during a 6-month period at a London teaching hospital. Patients were risk assessed, and examined to detect PUs and to determine the type of mattress. We compared our findings with clinical (nursing and medical) documentation. Interventions were made through questionnaires given to staff, educational sessions, presentations and posters addressing where improvements could be made in risk stratifying patients. A repeat audit was carried out 24 months later and the results from both cycles were compared. Statistical analysis was carried out using Fisher's exact and the Student's T-test. In total 100 in-patients were assessed in each cycle with a mean age of 71.4 years in cycle 1 and 70.1 years in cycle 2. A nursing Waterlow score was recorded for 81% of patients in cycle 1 and 100% in cycle 2 (p<0.05). In cycle 1, the average nursing score was significantly lower than that from the study (mean 13.7 versus 17.1, median 14.0 versus 18.0; p<0.05), but after intervention this had reduced to a minimal difference (mean 8.5 versus 9.0, median 8.0 versus 9.0, p=0.08). Nursing scores recorded in the notes were lower than the study scores in cycle 1, primarily from a failure to appropriately assess certain categories of the Waterlow scale. These differences reduced after focused education of staff. Our results suggest that targeted interventions tailored towards nursing and medical staff can result in improvements in the risk assessment for prevention and subsequent management of PUs. However, it also highlights the need for increased input from the entire multidisciplinary team in order to reduce the morbidity caused by PUs. The authors have no conflict of interest. No funding was received for this study.