Prevalence Of Pressure Injuries Research Articles

The Changing Prevalence of Pressure Injury among Ontarians with SCI/D at Rehabilitation Admission: Opportunities for Improvement

The Changing Prevalence of Pressure Injury among Ontarians with SCI/D at Rehabilitation Admission: Opportunities for Improvement

Incidence, prevalence, and medical costs of pressure injuries in Taiwan from 2001 to 2015: Results of a retrospective cohort study

Incidence, prevalence, and medical costs of pressure injuries in Taiwan from 2001 to 2015: Results of a retrospective cohort study

Comparative analysis of pressure ulcer development in stroke patients within and outside healthcare facilities: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

The risk of pressure ulcers in stroke patients is a significant concern, impacting their recovery and quality of life. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigate the prevalence and risk factors of pressure ulcers in stroke patients, comparing those in healthcare facilities with those in home-based or non-clinical environments. The study aims to elucidate how different care settings affect the development of pressure ulcers, serving as a crucial indicator of patient care quality and management across diverse healthcare contexts. Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies on stroke patients in various settings, reporting on the incidence or prevalence of pressure ulcers. Exclusion criteria included non-stroke patients, non-original research and studies with incomplete data. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used for quality assessment, and statistical analyses involved both fixed-effect and random-effects models, depending on the heterogeneity observed. A total of 1542 articles were initially identified, with 11 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. The studies exhibited significant heterogeneity, necessitating the use of a random-effects model. The pooled prevalence of pressure injuries was 9.53% in patients without family medical services and 2.64% in patients with medical services. Sensitivity analysis confirmed the stability of these results, and no significant publication bias was detected through funnel plot analysis and Egger's linear regression test. The meta-analysis underscores the heightened risk of pressure injuries in stroke patients, especially post-discharge. It calls for concerted efforts among healthcare providers, policymakers and caregivers to implement targeted strategies tailored to the specific needs of different care environments. Future research should focus on developing and evaluating interventions to effectively integrate into routine care and reduce the incidence of pressure injuries in stroke patients.

The frequency of pressure injury in level 3 intensive care units and determination of risk factors: A cross-sectional study

AimThis study was carried out to determine the prevalence of pressure injury and risk factors in patients hospitalized in a university hospital's level 3 intensive care unit. DesignIt is a descriptive, prospective, observational type study. MethodThe sample of the study consisted of 176 patients aged 18 and over who were admitted to the intensive care units of a University Hospital for at least 24 h. Patient Information Form and Braden Risk Assessment Scale, Glasgow Coma Scale were used to collect data. IBM SPSS Statistics 20 program was used to analyze the data. ResultsPresence of chronic disease in the development of pressure injury (22.7%), high-risk patients according to the Glasgow Coma Scale (21%), high-risk patients according to the Braden Risk Assessment Scale (84.2%), low hemoglobin (31%), low albumin levels (32.4%) and duration of stay in the intensive care unit until the day of evaluation were found to be independent risk factors (p < 0.05). The prevalence of pressure injury was determined to be 32.4%, and the rate of pressure injury due to medical devices was 7.4%. ConclusionPressure injuries are still common in adult intensive care patients. In terms of patient safety, it is important to give more space to care standards and awareness-raising research and training to prevent pressure injuries.

Prevalence of pressure injury on the medical wards of public general hospitals in Kuwait: a national cross-sectional study

BackgroundPressure injury is a severe problem that can significantly impact a patient’s health, quality of life, and healthcare expenses. The prevalence of pressure injuries is a widely used clinical indicator of patient safety and quality of care. This study aims to address the research gap that exists on this topic in Kuwait by investigating the prevalence of pressure injuries and preventive measures on the medical wards of the country’s public general hospitals.MethodsA cross-sectional research design was adopted to measure the point prevalence of pressure injuries on 54 medical wards in the public general hospitals. Data, including variables pertaining to hospitals, patients, pressure injuries and preventive practices, were collected using an online form. The data were processed and analysed using Microsoft Excel and SPSS 23 (α level = 0.05). Analysis provided an overview of patient, pressure injury characteristics and preventive measures, and the relationships between the patient and pressure injury characteristics and the prevalence of pressure injuries. A model for predicting the determinants of pressure injury prevalence was constructed from a linear regression analysis.ResultsThe mean national prevalence of pressure injury was 17.6% (95% CI: 11.3–23.8). Purely community-acquired pressure injuries represent the majority of pressure injuries nationally (58.1%). Regarding preventive measures, “pressure injury assessment on admission” has been provided to 65.5% of patients. Correlation analysis revealed that the only statistically significant correlation with the prevalence of hospital-acquired pressure injury was “pressure injury assessment on admission”, which was strongly negative (ρ = −0.857). Therefore, this was the only variable included in the regression analysis as a predictor of pressure injury prevalence (Beta = 0.839). The results showed many statistically significant differences between hospitals with respect to the variables studied.ConclusionsThe national pressure injury prevalence is high compared to the global rate. The higher percentage of purely community-acquired pressure injuries requires particular attention. Many risk factors for the development of pressure injuries are public health concerns, and effective mitigating strategies are needed. Further research is required to assess the knowledge, attitude, and behaviour of nurses with respect to pressure injuries, and to evaluate preventive and management practices.

Pressure injury prevalence in critical care settings: An observational pre-post intervention study.

To explore pressure injury prevention practices and evaluate the impact of an educational intervention on PI prevalence before and after an educational intervention. A multi-centre observational study. Data were collected at two time points in May 2021 and April 2022 using a Qualtrics® online form. Two Registered Nurses at each site collected observational data at each time point by diagnosing and staging any identified pressure injuries as part of a prevalence study. Patients admitted to participating units were included. A total of 181 patients in critical care units were included at the two-time points. Pressure injury prevalence was 60.9% at the outset, with 52.9% hospital-acquired, 37.9% unit-acquired and 23.0% medical device-related. Post-intervention prevalence decreased significantly to 28.7%, including 21.3% hospital-acquired, 14.9% unit-acquired, and 8.5% medical device-related. Pressure injuries were prominent in the sacral region, head area, and heels. Stages I and II pressure injuries were the most common. Increased age and longer ICU stays are linked to a heightened risk of pressure injury development in critically ill patients, whereas higher haemoglobin levels show an inverse relationship with the development of both pressure injury and severe stages in the univariate analysis. The predictive models revealed that increased age and longer ICU stays are predictors for both pressure injury development and progression to severe stages, while Braden scores predict the likelihood of developing severe stages of pressure injuries. This study has identified a benchmark for pressure injury prevalence in critical care units in Saudi Arabia. The results demonstrate that pressure injuries can be prevented in critically ill patients when evidence-based education strategies are implemented. Pressure injuries are an important issue for critically ill patients and can be prevented with proper investments. Strategies to prevent pressure injuries from admission will result in fewer pressure injuries. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines and the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist. No patient or public contribution.

Prevalence of hospital-acquired pressure injuries in intensive care units of the Eastern Mediterranean region: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundHospital-acquired pressure injuries are a major patient safety concern in intensive care units that are considered largely preventable adverse events by adherence to nursing standards of care. The hypothesis of this research was to investigate the prevalence of hospital-acquired pressure injuries in intensive care units (ICUs) of the Eastern Mediterranean Region.MethodsThis study was designed as a systematic review and meta-analysis. All articles published on Pressure ulcer prevalence in the ICUs of hospitals in Eastern Mediterranean Region countries, identified by searching PubMed through MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar from January 1, 2011, until September 22, 2023. The reference lists of these articles were checked for additional relevant studies. Data were analyzed using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Software (v.2.2.064).ResultsA total of 15 articles met the inclusion criteria. Based on the random-effects model, the overall Pressure ulcer prevalence rate was 16.6% (95% CI (8.6-29.6)). Both the highest and lowest prevalence was observed in Jordan in 2011 at 83.1% (95% CI (71.2- 90.7)) and in 2012 at 0.9% (95% CI (0.5- 1.5)), respectively. The results showed that publication year, average age, and sample size were the main causes of heterogeneity between the reviewed studies (p < 0.05).ConclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis of the pertinent peer-reviewed literature revealed a high prevalence of hospital-acquired pressure injuries of 16% in intensive care units of Eastern Mediterranean region. Therefore, it is necessary for health policymakers and managers in Eastern Mediterranean Region to take necessary measures to prevent the incidence of Pressure ulcers in hospitals, especially in ICUs.

Pressure injuries in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients utilising different prone positioning techniques – A prospective observational study

ObjectivesTo compare the incidence and distribution of pressure injuries (PIs) with two approaches to prone positioning for mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients, and to determine the prevalence of these PIs on intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital discharge. DesignA prospective observational study. SettingAdult patients admitted to a quaternary ICU with COVID-19-associated acute lung injury, between September 2021 and February 2022. Main Outcome MeasuresIncidence and anatomical distribution of PIs during ICU stay for “Face Down” and “Swimmers Position” as well as on ICU and hospital discharge. ResultsWe investigated 206 prone episodes in 63 patients. In the Face Down group, 26 of 34 patients (76 %) developed at least one PI, compared to 10 of 22 patients (45 %) in the Swimmers Position group (p = 0.02). Compared to the Swimmers Position group, the Face Down group developed more pressure injuries per patient (median 1 [1, 3] vs 0 [0, 2], p = 0.04) and had more facial PIs (p = 0.002). In a multivariate logistic regression model, patients were more likely to have at least one PI with Face Down position (OR 4.67, 95 % CI 1.28, 17.04, p = 0.02) and greater number of prone episodes (OR 1.75, 95 % CI 1.12, 2.74, p = 0.01). Over 80 % of all PIs were either stage 1 or stage 2. By ICU discharge, 29 % had healed and by hospital discharge, 73 % of all PIs had healed. ConclusionSwimmers Position had a significantly lower incidence of PIs compared to the Face Down approach. One-quarter of PIs had healed by time of ICU discharge and three-quarters by time of hospital discharge. Implications for Clinical PracticeThere are differences in incidence of PIs related to prone positioning approaches. This study validates and helps better inform current prone position guidelines recommending the use of Swimmers Position. The low prevalence of PIs at hospital discharge is reassuring.

Prevalence of hospital-acquired pressure injuries in intensive care units of the Eastern Mediterranean region: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundHospital-acquired pressure injuries are a major patient safety concern in intensive care units that are considered largely preventable adverse events by adherence to nursing standards of care. The hypothesis of this research was to investigate the prevalence of hospital-acquired pressure injuries in intensive care units (ICUs) of the Eastern Mediterranean Region.MethodsThis study was designed as a systematic review and meta-analysis. All articles published on Pressure ulcer prevalence in the ICUs of hospitals in Eastern Mediterranean Region countries, identified by searching PubMed through MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar from January 1, 2011, until September 22, 2023. The reference lists of these articles were checked for additional relevant studies. Data were analyzed using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Software (v.2.2.064).ResultsA total of 15 articles met the inclusion criteria. Based on the random-effects model, the overall Pressure ulcer prevalence rate was 16.6% (95% CI (8.6–29.6)). Both the highest and lowest prevalence was observed in Jordan in 2011 at 83.1% (95% CI (71.2- 90.7)) and in 2012 at 0.9% (95% CI (0.5- 1.5)), respectively. The results showed that publication year, average age, and sample size were the main causes of heterogeneity between the reviewed studies (p < 0.05).ConclusionThis systematic review and meta-analysis of the pertinent peer-reviewed literature revealed a high prevalence of hospital-acquired pressure injuries of 16% in intensive care units of Eastern Mediterranean region. Therefore, it is necessary for health policymakers and managers in Eastern Mediterranean Region to take necessary measures to prevent the incidence of Pressure ulcers in hospitals, especially in ICUs.

Prevalence of pressure injury in patients on enteral nutritional therapy with COVID-19

Prevalence of pressure injury in patients on enteral nutritional therapy with COVID-19

Socio-economic and environmental factors associated with community-acquired pressure injuries: A mixed method study

AimsTo: (1) report on the prevalence of community-acquired pressure injuries (CAPIs) in patients admitted into the acute care setting; (2) examine the socio-economic and home environment associated with CAPIs; and (3) understand the challenges of caring for patients with CAPIs at home. MethodsThis mixed-method study recruited patients admitted with CAPIs in the acute care hospital between March 2021 to June 2022. The hospital's pressure injury (PI) database was used to screen patients admitted with CAPIs. A purposive sample of CAPI patients and their caregivers participated in this study. A cross-sectional survey study was first performed to examine the prevalence of CAPIs and the socio-economic and home environment factors. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to understand the caregivers' challenges in caring for patients with CAPIs at home. ResultsThe CAPI prevalence was reported at 1.1 % during the study period (1039 had CAPIs out of 97 912 patients admitted to the hospital). A total of 70 caregivers and patients consented to participate in the study. The mean age of patients was 84.2 (SD = 10.4) years old; 68.6 % (n = 48) were females. Majority presented with a deep tissue injury (DTI) (37.1 %; n = 26) or unstageable PI (31.4 %; n = 22). More than half of the patients had alternating air mattresses at home (54.3 %; n = 38), and only 10 % (n = 7) had positioning wedges and used a sliding sheet for turning. The mean age of the caregivers was 43.4 years old (SD = 13.1), and 84.3 % (n = 59) were female. Continuous data were summarised using means and standard deviations, and categorical data were summarised using frequencies and percentages. Logistic regression found no significant socio-demographic and clinical predictors of patients having PI stages 2, 3, and 4 compared to patients with DTI and unstageable PI. Challenges to caring for PI at home included high financial burden, physical limitations, and personal challenges in CAPIs management. ConclusionCAPIs are prevalent among older patients admitted to the acute care setting. Understanding the influence of socio-economic factors is crucial for developing comprehensive strategies to mitigate the occurrence and impact of PIs. Ongoing support and education to the caregivers in the community is essential to address the reported challenges in PI care.

Mucosal membrane pressure injury in intensive care units: A scoping review

AimTo describe published work on the current situation of mucosal membrane pressure injury of patients in the intensive care unit. BackgroundDevice-related pressure injuries in critically ill patients are mostly focused on skin surface injuries, and less attention is paid to mucosal membrane pressure injury. MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library from database construction until March 1, 2023. Two researchers independently screened and extracted data. ResultsEighteen articles met our criteria and were published in 2014–2023. The included studies showed that the incidence of mucosal membrane pressure injury in critically ill patients ranged from 0.83% to 88.2%, and the prevalence ranged from 0.16% to 55.6%. The most frequently reported site of mucosal injury is the oral mucosa, followed by the nasal mucosa. Ten studies used Braden to assess the risk of mucosal membrane pressure injury, and only six studies reported specific stages of mucosal membrane pressure injury. Thirteen studies described 30 risk factors for mucosal membrane pressure injury, with albumin being the most frequently reported risk factor, followed by the vasoconstrictive drugs use. Thirty risk factors were summarized in six aspects: medical device-related factors, disease-related factors, treatment- related factors, physiological and biochemical parameters, demographic-related factors, and microbial colonisation. ConclusionsThe incidence or prevalence of mucosal membrane pressure injury varies widely, and specific risk assessment tools and standardized staging criteria need to be further determined. The risk factors of mucosal membrane pressure injury involve multiple aspects, and some risk factors have only been explored in few studies and need to be further verified, in order to detect the risk group of mucosal membrane pressure injury early and take targeted preventive measures. Implications for Clinical PracticeWe synthesized the current research status of mucosal membrane pressure injury in critically ill patients, which can provide a valuable reference for the clinical staff to develop preventive and management measures for such patients.

Intrinsic and Extrinsic Risk Factors for Nosocomial Pressure Injury among Hospitalized Adults at a Tertiary Hospital in Western Kenya

The high incidence and prevalence of nosocomial pressure injuries pose a threat to safe hospitalization and additional strain on the healthcare system. Analysis of pressure injury risk factors is necessary for efficient prevention and management as part of the program to ensure that no patient experiences any preventable harm while receiving care, as per the international patient safety goals. This study evaluated the intrinsic and extrinsic risk factors for pressure injury among cohorts of hospitalized adults using a prospective approach. The Braden Scale was used to assess the participants’ level of risk and classify low (score 15 to 23) and high (score 6 to 14) cohorts prior to follow-up. Binary regression analysis was used to establish an association between the risk factors and the development of stage 2 and above pressure injuries and the odds reported. The intrinsic factors—nutrition, sex, age, and primary diagnosis—influenced the occurrence of pressure injuries. Similarly, the extrinsic factors—sensory perception, moisture, mobility and activity, presence of a medical device, friction, and shear—showed an association with the development of pressure injuries. Poor nutrition, impaired mobility, and persistent moisture, however, were statistically the most significantly associated risk factors, at OR 18.20, CI 2.18–151.69, p =.01; OR 20.93, CI 1.13–387.92, p =.04; OR 16.11, CI 2.02–128.52, p =.01, respectively, confirming a significant association between intrinsic and extrinsic risk factors and the development of hospital-acquired pressure injury. These identified risk factors can be used to tailor intervention earlier on admission and avert these preventable injuries. Standardized, timely risk assessment and proactive addressing of the identified risk factor among hospitalized patients are therefore recommended.

The risk and prevalence of pressure injuries in older people in the home care service: a cross-sectional study.

This study aimed to understand the risk of developing pressure injuries (PIs) and their prevalence rate in older adults in Italy who received public funded home care services and who were often living alone. In May 2019, a cross-sectional study was performed according to the STROBE (STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology) guidelines. The data collection included demographic variables, a PI risk assessment using the Braden Scale score, the type of mobility devices available, the wound description detailing the PI category, body location and ongoing treatment. Data analysis was conducted using non-parametric descriptive statistics. Of the 2223 patients who participated in the study, the risk of developing a PI as measured with the Braden Scale sore was: 'absent' for 37.7%; 'mild' for 25.8%; 'moderate' for 13.8%; 'high' for 15.5%; and 'severe' for 7.1% of patients. The PI prevalence in the sample of home care service patients was 26%, of which 46% were inpatients with a Braden Scale score of <14. Of the PIs that developed during the study, 65% of these developed in patients in home care and of these, 81% had a Braden Scale score of ≤9. PIs developed not only during hospitalisation but at home. Assessing the commitment of patients and caregivers to PI prevention and treatment strategies in home care services could be key to reducing PI prevalence, hospital admissions for PIs, related complications for older people living at home, and the severity of the PI category.

Risk Factors and Prevalence of Pressure Injury in Elderly Hospitalized Patients

Risk Factors and Prevalence of Pressure Injury in Elderly Hospitalized Patients

Pressure injury prevention in adult critically ill patients: best practice implementation project.

This study assessed compliance with the best practices for pressure injury prevention among ICU patients at a tertiary hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. Intensive care patients are at a high risk of developing a pressure injury; preventing this requires a best practice protocol. This best practice implementation project was developed in a Brazilian tertiary hospital in three phases following the method proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. Ten criteria established based on the best available evidence were audited and monitored before and after best practice implementation. The baseline and follow-up audits evaluated 28 patients at each step. A total of 448 h of care were analyzed using a monitoring camera and medical records. Compliance with all 10 audited criteria increased, with a 50% reduction in the prevalence of pressure injuries in intensive care. Of the 223 employees, 71% claimed to have some knowledge of pressure injury prevention, and 66% reported adequate adherence to prevention protocols. The audit and feedback strategy improved compliance with the criteria. Future audits are needed to promote the sustainability of evidence-based practice.

Workshop (Clinical/Best Practice Implementation) ID 2001167

Background Hamilton’s Spinal Cord Injury (SCI) Regional Rehabilitation Program in collaboration with SCI Consortium is implementing tissue integrity monitoring for pressure injury (PI) prevention. An increased prevalence of PI was found in 2021 - 2022 compared to 2020 on Hamilton’s SCI Rehabilitation Unit. To address this finding, the clinical team introduced a staff and patient education program focused on PI prevention. Upon completion of this workshop, the attendees will be aware of the CQI methodology used to implement the best practices related to tissue integrity and appreciate the education pathway for both staff and patients. Methods Using a Continuous Quality Improvement model, a systematic approach was used to enhance the education model for staff and patients on skin assessment and appropriate interventions. A process map was created outlining steps for each discipline involved in skin assessment, intervention, and patient education. Education plan included Skin &amp; Wound Management workshop, individual and group patient education, daily skin check calendar for patient/staff use. The workshop will be delivered in a lecture format, ending with discussion time. Results Preliminary data post partial implementation of the education program showed a decrease of 12% in the prevalence of PIs in the patients discharged from the program between July 2022 and March 2023 compared to January 2021 – June 2022. Conclusion Preliminary results are encouraging in demonstrating that implementation of a comprehensive education plan for staff and patients using a structured framework is effective in reducing the prevalence of pressure injuries in the inpatient SCI rehab unit.

Incidence, prevalence and risk factors of device-related pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit: A meta-analysis of 10,084 patients from 11 countries.

Device-related pressure injuries (DRPIs) prevail in the intensive care unit (ICU) and have much to do with medical devices and patients' conditions. This meta-analysis aims to systematically assess the incidence, prevalence and risk factors related to DRPIs among adults in ICU. Web of Science, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, PubMed and CINAHL were searched from inception to March 2023. Observational studies were included, and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) was used to assess literature quality. The primary outcomes were the incidence, prevalence and risk factors regarding DRPIs among adults in ICU. The 19 studies conformed to the criteria for inclusion in the review. The estimated pooled incidence of DRPIs was 14.7% (95% CI: 9.7%-19.6%) in 10 studies (4866 participants). The estimated pooled prevalence of DRPIs was 19.0% (95% CI: 13.6%-24.3%) in 9 studies (5218 participants). The most significant risk factor for DRPIs was using mechanical ventilation. The pooled analysis of the four studies showed that DRPIs were more likely to occur in patients who required mechanical ventilation compared with patients who did not use mechanical ventilation (OR: 9.67, 95% CI: 5.03-18.61, p < 0.001) and using vasopressors, age, length of ICU stays, APACHE II score, Braden score, fever, sex, oedema, diabetes and number of medical devices, SOFA score was also related to pressure injuries risk. The incidence and prevalence of DRPIs in adult ICU were high, and the most significant risk factor for DRPIs was using mechanical ventilation. It is imminent to identify patients of increased risk with DRPIs early.

Pressure Injury Prevalence and Risk Factors: A National Multicenter Analytical Study.

The purpose of this study was to determine the point prevalence (PP) of general pressure injuries (PIs), hospital-acquired PIs, PI-related risk factors, and PI preventive interventions performed by nurses. Descriptive, multicenter, prospective, analytical study. The sample comprised 5088 patients cared for in 13 hospitals in 12 geographic regions of Turkey. Data were collected between November 5, 2018, and July 17, 2019. The study was carried out in 2 stages. First, nurses who collected data were trained in the diagnosis of PI, risk assessment, staging, and prevalence studies, and informed about the purpose and methods of the study, including data collection. Second, nurses and researchers who had received training related to data collection for this study conducted a PP study for PIs in their inpatient clinics using the ASSIST II method. The PI Prevalence Study Tool and the Braden Scale for Predicting Pressure Sore Risk were also used during data collection. The PP of general PIs was 9.5%; the prevalence of PIs with hospitalization in intensive care units was 43.2%; medical device-related pressure injuries prevalence was 10.7%. We found that 65.1% of the PIs were acquired after hospital admission. Similarities exist between PI prevalence in Turkey and reported PI prevalence rates worldwide. However, the prevalence of nosocomial PIs related to intensive care units and the prevalence of all nosocomial injuries were higher than rates previously reported. Based on results, there is a need to develop strategies to reduce the prevalence of nosocomial PIs.

The incidence and prevalence of medical device-related pressure injuries in pediatric patients: Systematic review and meta-analysis

ProblemTo determine the pooled incidence and prevalence rate of medical device-related pressure injuries(MDRPIs) using the Braden QD scale, medical devices that frequently cause MDRPIs, and anatomical locations that are vulnerable to them. Eligibility criteriaUsing the Braden QD scale, being published in English between 01/01/2018-and 01/03/2023. MethodsThis study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis recommendations and registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews database (No: CRD42021276501). SampleA total of 7 studies with 25,742 pediatric patients were included. ResultsThe pooled prevalence and cumulative incidence of hospital-acquired pressure injuries(HAPIs) were 7.8% (95% CI: 5.2–11.4%) and 3.9% (95% CI: 0.5–24.6%) respectively, and the incidence rate was 8.2/1000 person-days (95% CI: 2.4–14.2/1000 person-days). The pooled prevalence and cumulative incidence of MDRPIs were 7% (95% CI: 5.5–8.8%) and 5% (95% CI: 3.2–7.8%) respectively, and the incidence rate was 6.7/1000 person-days (95% CI, 0.11–13.4/1000 person-days). The most affected anatomical locations were the face (29.1%), ankle/foot (20.1%), and head (15.7%). Medical devices that frequently caused MDRPIs were external monitoring devices (24.5%), respiratory devices (22.8%), and supportive/securing devices (14.9%). ConclusionsAccording to the current systematic review and meta-analyses, the incidence and prevalence of HAPIs and MDRPIs are moderate to high. ImplicationsThe findings suggested that healthcare providers should pay more attention to reducing HAPIs and MDRPIs and future studies should be conducted to understand their characteristics and risk factors.