Abstract
ABSTRACT Objective: to verify the correlation between the Bates-Jensen Wound Assessment Tool and the Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing instruments for assessing pressure ulcers in adults. Method: a cross-sectional study, carried out in the unit for patients with multidrug-resistant germs, in a Brazilian public hospital. Data collection took place in 2017, with a sample of 110 injuries, through direct inspection and application of the proposed instruments. The data were analyzed using descriptive and analytical statistics. Results: the study included 36 patients with a mean age of 45.4±21.3 years old; 23 (63.9%) were male, with higher frequency of involvement of the sacral region (35; 31.9%), with 43 Stage II pressure ulcers (39.1%). The mean score of the Bates-Jensen Wound Assessment Tool was 35.5±8.9, and that of the Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing was 11.75±3.57 (r=0.74 and p<0.01). Conclusion: the study achieved its objective by verifying a strong correlation and a positive association between BWAT and PUSH. BWAT provides a thorough assessment of the injury while PUSH is easy and quick to apply. It is up to each Nursing service to decide which instrument is best suited to the reality regarding the work demand.
Highlights
In recent years, many perspectives have focused on patient safety, understood as reducing the risk of unnecessary harms to health care to an acceptable minimum
The knowledge of measures that assist in the assessment and documentation of the injuries allows for the choice of interventions that favor healing, reducing the patient’s suffering[3].pressure ulcer (PU) is characterized by damages to the skin and/or to the underlying structures, usually bony prominences, caused by isolated pressure or combined with shear and/or friction, classified according to the degree of damage observed in the tissues[4]
Multidisciplinary care for patients with multidrug-resistant germs (MRGs) is one of the characteristics of the unit.The research population consisted of MRG patients with PUs caused within the institution or coming from the community
Summary
Many perspectives have focused on patient safety, understood as reducing the risk of unnecessary harms to health care to an acceptable minimum. The knowledge of measures that assist in the assessment and documentation of the injuries allows for the choice of interventions that favor healing, reducing the patient’s suffering[3].PU is characterized by damages to the skin and/or to the underlying structures, usually bony prominences, caused by isolated pressure or combined with shear and/or friction, classified according to the degree of damage observed in the tissues[4] It can be classified into four distinct stages: Stage I presents intact skin with erythema that does not whiten; Stage II is characterized by loss of skin in its partial thickness with exposure of the dermis; Stage III is characterized by loss of skin in its total thickness; and Stage IV, by loss of skin in its total thickness and tissue loss
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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.
