Pressure Ulcer Prevention Care Bundle Research Articles

The effect of a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle on nursing workload costs

AimThis study investigated the effect of care under the guidance of a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle on pressure ulcer incidence rates and on nursing workload costs. Design, setting, and participantsThis prospective pre-post interventional study was conducted in an anesthesia and reanimation intensive care unit. The sample consisted of 16 nurses and 84 patients. MethodsThe study was conducted in two periods: (1) nursing workload of pre-care bundle period and (2) nursing workload of post-care bundle period. In the collection of data, 6 forms (the demographic data forms, the Braden scale, nurse information form, the care bundle follow-up form and nursing workload follow-up form) were administered. The main outcomes of the study; Pressure ulcer incidence rate was evaluated with Form V, and nursing workload costs were evaluated with Form VI. These forms were evaluated daily by the nurses. In the first period (15.09.2018–30.11.2018), pressure ulcer incidence rates and nursing workload costs were evaluated before training. Then, the researcher trained nurses on how to prevent pressure ulcers and use the care bundle. The care bundles components were risk assessment, skincare, activity, in-service training, nutrition, wetness/incontinence and support surface management, and keeping records. In the second period (01.12.2018–15.02.2019), pressure ulcer incidence rates and nursing workload costs were evaluated after the training. The outcomes of the two periods regarding the incidence of pressure ulcers and nursing workload costs were compared. ResultsThe pressure ulcer incidence rates before and after the care bundle were 22.1 and 13.0 per 100 patient-day, respectively. There was a decrease in pressure ulcer incidence rates after the care bundle, but it wasn't significant (p = 0.138). The total workload cost of pressure ulcer prevention was significantly lower after the care bundle than before (p = 0.001). ConclusionThe pressure ulcer incidence rates were lower after the care bundle than before, albeit insignificantly. The total pressure ulcer prevention workload costs were significantly lower after the care bundle than before. The reduction in pressure ulcer incidence and workload cost indicates that the use of care bundle is effective. Healthcare professionals in intensive care units should use a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle more often.

Patient and lay carer education for preventing pressure ulceration in at-risk populations.

Patient and lay carer education for preventing pressure ulceration in at-risk populations.

Using the SSKIN care bundle to prevent pressure ulcers in the intensive care unit.

Pressure ulcers develop when the skin and underlying tissues are subjected to pressure, friction and/or shear, and, in many cases, moisture. These factors lead to impaired blood supply and injury to the skin and underlying tissues. Patients being cared for in intensive care units are particularly at risk of pressure ulcers because they often lack the ability to change position independently. Also, their consciousness and sensory perception are impaired due to sedation and anaesthesia, diminished circulation and malnutrition. This article examines pressure ulcer prevention in this vulnerable group of patients and outlines the five-step SSKIN (surface, skin inspection, kinetics/keep moving, incontinence/moisture, nutrition/hydration) pressure ulcer prevention care bundle.

The cost-effectiveness of a patient centred pressure ulcer prevention care bundle: Findings from the INTACT cluster randomised trial

BackgroundPressure ulcers are serious, avoidable, costly and common adverse outcomes of healthcare. ObjectivesTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a patient-centred pressure ulcer prevention care bundle compared to standard care. DesignCost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses of pressure ulcer prevention performed from the health system perspective using data collected alongside a cluster-randomised trial. SettingsEight tertiary hospitals in Australia. ParticipantsAdult patients receiving either a patient-centred pressure ulcer prevention care bundle (n=799) or standard care (n=799). MethodsDirect costs related to the intervention and preventative strategies were collected from trial data and supplemented by micro-costing data on patient turning and skin care from a 4-week substudy (n=317). The time horizon for the economic evaluation matched the trial duration, with the endpoint being diagnosis of a new pressure ulcer, hospital discharge/transfer or 28days; whichever occurred first. For the cost-effectiveness analysis, the primary outcome was the incremental costs of prevention per additional hospital acquired pressure ulcer case avoided, estimated using a two-stage cluster-adjusted non-parametric bootstrap method. The cost-benefit analysis estimated net monetary benefit, which considered both the costs of prevention and any difference in length of stay. All costs are reported in AU$(2015). ResultsThe care bundle cost AU$144.91 (95%CI: $74.96 to $246.08) more per patient than standard care. The largest contributors to cost were clinical nurse time for repositioning and skin inspection. In the cost-effectiveness analysis, the care bundle was estimated to cost an additional $3296 (95%CI: dominant to $144,525) per pressure ulcer avoided. This estimate is highly uncertain. Length of stay was unexpectedly higher in the care bundle group. In a cost-benefit analysis which considered length of stay, the net monetary benefit for the care bundle was estimated to be −$2320 (95%CI −$3900, −$1175) per patient, suggesting the care bundle was not a cost-effective use of resources. ConclusionsA pressure ulcer prevention care bundle consisting of multicomponent nurse training and patient education may promote best practice nursing care but may not be cost-effective in preventing hospital acquired pressure ulcer.

Patients’ Perceptions of a Pressure Ulcer Prevention Care Bundle in Hospital: A Qualitative Descriptive Study to Guide Evidence‐Based Practice

Pressure ulcers place a significant burden on patients and hospitals. Our team developed and tested a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle (PUPCB) in a cluster randomized trial. As part of the process evaluation conducted alongside the trial, we explored patients' perceptions of the intervention. To identify patients' perceptions and experiences of a PUPCB in hospital. This qualitative descriptive study explored the perceptions of a subset of patients who participated in a trial testing the PUPCB across four intervention hospitals. A trained interviewer conducted semistructured interviews, which were digitally recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using thematic analysis. Nineteen patients were interviewed across the four hospitals. Three main themes emerged: (a) importance of personal contact in PUPCB delivery; (b) understanding pressure ulcer prevention (PUP) enhances participation; and (c) individual factors impact patients' engagement in PUP. The extent to which patients adopted the intervention appeared to be influenced by the complexity of education materials, compatibility with patients' existing knowledge and beliefs, and perceived advantage of the intervention; ability for human interaction; and patient-related facilitators and barriers to participating in PUP care. This study found patients accepted a PUPCB that encouraged participation in care, particularly as it involved personal and positive interactions with nurses and provision of information that was easy to understand and resonated with patients.

Process evaluation of a cluster-randomised trial testing a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle: a mixed-methods study

BackgroundAs pressure ulcers contribute to significant patient burden and increased health care costs, their prevention is a clinical priority. Our team developed and tested a complex intervention, a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle promoting patient participation in care, in a cluster-randomised trial. The UK Medical Research Council recommends process evaluation of complex interventions to provide insight into why they work or fail and how they might be improved. This study aimed to evaluate processes underpinning implementation of the intervention and explore end-users’ perceptions of it, in order to give a deeper understanding of its effects.MethodsA pre-specified, mixed-methods process evaluation was conducted as an adjunct to the main trial, guided by a framework for process evaluation of cluster-randomised trials. Data was collected across eight Australian hospitals but mainly focused on the four intervention hospitals. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected across the evaluation domains: recruitment, reach, intervention delivery and response to intervention, at both cluster and individual patient level. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Qualitative data were analysed using thematic analysis.ResultsIn the context of the main trial, which found a 42% reduction in risk of pressure ulcer with the intervention that was not significant after adjusting for clustering and covariates, this process evaluation provides important insights. Recruitment and reach among clusters and individuals was high, indicating that patients, nurses and hospitals are willing to engage with a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle. Of 799 intervention patients in the trial, 96.7% received the intervention, which took under 10 min to deliver. Patients and nurses accepted the care bundle, recognising benefits to it and describing how it enabled participation in pressure ulcer prevention (PUP) care.ConclusionsThis process evaluation found no major failures relating to implementation of the intervention. The care bundle was found to be easy to understand and deliver, and it reached a large proportion of the target population and was found to be acceptable to patients and nurses; therefore, it may be an effective way of engaging patients in their pressure ulcer prevention care and promoting evidence-based practise.

Nurses' perceptions of a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle: a qualitative descriptive study.

BackgroundPressure ulcer prevention is a critical patient safety indicator for acute care hospitals. An innovative pressure ulcer prevention care bundle targeting patient participation in their care was recently tested in a cluster randomised trial in eight Australian hospitals. Understanding nurses’ perspectives of such an intervention is imperative when interpreting results and translating evidence into practice. As part of a process evaluation for the main trial, this study assessed nurses’ perceptions of the usefulness and impact of a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle intervention on clinical practice.MethodsThis qualitative descriptive study involved semi-structured interviews with nursing staff at four Australian hospitals that were intervention sites for a cluster randomised trial testing a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle. Four to five participants were purposively sampled at each site. A trained interviewer used a semi-structured interview guide to question participants about their perceptions of the care bundle. Interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis.ResultsEighteen nurses from four hospitals participated in the study. Nurses’ perceptions of the intervention are described in five themes: 1) Awareness of the pressure ulcer prevention care bundle and its similarity to current practice; 2) Improving awareness, communication and participation with the pressure ulcer prevention care bundle; 3) Appreciating the positive aspects of patient participation in care; 4) Perceived barriers to engaging patients in the pressure ulcer prevention care bundle; and 5) Partnering with nursing staff to facilitate pressure ulcer prevention care bundle implementation.ConclusionsOverall, nurses found the care bundle feasible and acceptable. They identified a number of benefits from the bundle, including improved communication, awareness and participation in pressure ulcer prevention care among patients and staff. However, nurses thought the care bundle was not appropriate or effective for all patients, such as those who were cognitively impaired. Perceived enablers to implementation of the bundle included facilitation through effective communication and dissemination of evidence about the care bundle; strong leadership and ability to influence staff behaviour; and simplicity of the care bundle.

ISQUA16-2368THE EFFECT OF A PATIENT CENTRED CARE BUNDLE INTERVENTION ON PRESSURE ULCER INCIDENCES (INTACT)

Hospital acquired pressure ulcers (HAPU) are a serious patient safety concern, resulting in poor patient outcomes and high healthcare costs. We developed a patient-centred pressure ulcer prevention care bundle (PUPCB) with input from patients, nurses and other health professionals. The objective of this study was to test the effectiveness of this PUPCB on incidence of HAPU in at-risk hospitalised patients. This cluster randomised trial recruited tertiary hospitals with >200 beds in three Australian states. Patients were eligible if they were: …

The effect of a patient centred care bundle intervention on pressure ulcer incidence (INTACT): A cluster randomised trial

BackgroundHospital-acquired pressure ulcers are a serious patient safety concern, associated with poor patient outcomes and high healthcare costs. They are also viewed as an indicator of nursing care quality. ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle in preventing hospital-acquired pressure ulcers among at risk patients. DesignPragmatic cluster randomised trial. SettingEight tertiary referral hospitals with >200 beds each in three Australian states. Participants1600 patients (200/hospital) were recruited. Patients were eligible if they were: ≥18 years old; at risk of pressure ulcer because of limited mobility; expected to stay in hospital ≥48h and able to read English. MethodsHospitals (clusters) were stratified in two groups by recent pressure ulcer rates and randomised within strata to either a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle or standard care. The care bundle was theoretically and empirically based on patient participation and clinical practice guidelines. It was multi-component, with three messages for patients’ participation in pressure ulcer prevention care: keep moving; look after your skin; and eat a healthy diet. Training aids for patients included a DVD, brochure and poster. Nurses in intervention hospitals were trained in partnering with patients in their pressure ulcer prevention care. The statistician, recruiters, and outcome assessors were blinded to group allocation and interventionists blinded to the study hypotheses, tested at both the cluster and patient level. The primary outcome, incidence of hospital-acquired pressure ulcers, which applied to both the cluster and individual participant level, was measured by daily skin inspection. ResultsFour clusters were randomised to each group and 799 patients per group analysed. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.035. After adjusting for clustering and pre-specified covariates (age, pressure ulcer present at baseline, body mass index, reason for admission, residence and number of comorbidities on admission), the hazard ratio for new pressure ulcers developed (pressure ulcer prevention care bundle relative to standard care) was 0.58 (95% CI: 0.25, 1.33; p=0.198). No adverse events or harms were reported. ConclusionsAlthough the pressure ulcer prevention care bundle was associated with a large reduction in the hazard of ulceration, there was a high degree of uncertainty around this estimate and the difference was not statistically significant. Possible explanations for this non-significant finding include that the pressure ulcer prevention care bundle was effective but the sample size too small to detect this.

​Patient and lay carer education for preventing pressure ulceration in at-risk populations

​Patient and lay carer education for preventing pressure ulceration in at-risk populations

Understanding nurses' views on a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle: a first step towards successful implementation

To explore nurses' views of the barriers and facilitators to the use of a newly devised patient-centred pressure ulcer prevention care bundle. Given pressure ulcer prevention strategies are not implemented consistently, the use of a pressure ulcer care bundle may improve implementation given bundles generally assist in standardising care. A quality improvement project was undertaken after a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle was developed and pilot-tested. Short, conversational interviews with nurse explored their views of a patient-centred pressure ulcer care bundle. Interviews were audio-taped and transcribed. Inductive content analysis was used to analyse the transcripts. A total of 20 nurses were interviewed. Five categories with corresponding subcategories emerged from the analysis. They were increasing awareness of pressure ulcer prevention, prompting pressure ulcer prevention activities, promoting active patient participation, barriers to using a pressure ulcer prevention care bundle and enabling integration of the pressure ulcer prevention care bundle into routine practice. Benefits of using a patient-centred pressure ulcer prevention care bundle may include prompting patients and staff to implement prevention strategies and promote active patient participation in care. The success of the care bundle relied on both patients' willingness to participate and nurses' willingness to incorporate it into their routine work. A patient-centred pressure ulcer prevention care bundle may facilitate more consistent implementation of pressure ulcer prevention strategies and active patient participation in care.

Development and Pilot Testing of a Patient-Participatory Pressure Ulcer Prevention Care Bundle

This study developed and piloted a patient-centered pressure ulcer prevention care bundle for adult hospitalized patients to promote patient participation in prevention. The care bundle had 3 core messages: (1) keep moving, (2) care for your skin, and (3) ensure a good diet. A brief video, combined brochure/checklist, and poster were developed as training resources. Patient evaluation identified benefits of the care bundle; however, the combined checklist/brochure was rarely used.