IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/clnure/v27y2018i6p643-659.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Pressure Ulcers Prevalence in the Acute Care Setting: A Systematic Review, 2000-2015

Author

Listed:
  • Ahmad Tubaishat
  • Panos Papanikolaou
  • Denis Anthony
  • Laila Habiballah

Abstract

Little is known about the prevalence of pressure ulcer (PrU) in acute care settings. The aim of this study is to determine the prevalence rate of PrU in acute care settings and to assess the methodological quality of the reviewed publications. The Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, British Nursing Index, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched using the keywords pressure ulcer or decubitus ulcer or bed sore or pressure sore or pressure injury , with prevalence and acute care , for studies published between January 2000 and December 2015. Nineteen publications met our criteria. These reported a prevalence range of between 7.8% and 54% for those using European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel methodology, 6% and 22% for those using National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel methodology, and 4.94% for the study that employed the Torrance system. The likely worldwide PrU prevalence rate range in acute care settings is between 6% and 18.5%. Prevalence rate varies between studies depending on the methodology of data collection. Moreover, the methodological quality of the included studies in the review was variable; therefore, it was difficult to compare the prevalence rate between the studies, settings, and countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Ahmad Tubaishat & Panos Papanikolaou & Denis Anthony & Laila Habiballah, 2018. "Pressure Ulcers Prevalence in the Acute Care Setting: A Systematic Review, 2000-2015," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 27(6), pages 643-659, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:27:y:2018:i:6:p:643-659
    DOI: 10.1177/1054773817705541
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1054773817705541
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1054773817705541?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mevlüde Karadag & Necla Gümüskaya, 2006. "The incidence of pressure ulcers in surgical patients: a sample hospital in Turkey," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 413-421, April.
    2. Esther Meesterberends & Ruud Halfens & Christa Lohrmann & Rianne De Wit, 2010. "Pressure ulcer guideline development and dissemination in Europe," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(11‐12), pages 1495-1503, June.
    3. Mariana F Cremasco & Fernanda Wenzel & Suely SV Zanei & Iveth Y Whitaker, 2013. "Pressure ulcers in the intensive care unit: the relationship between nursing workload, illness severity and pressure ulcer risk," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(15-16), pages 2183-2191, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pedro Sardo & Cláudia Simões & José Alvarelhão & César Costa & Carlos J Simões & Jorge Figueira & João L Simões & Francisco Amado & António Amaro & Elsa Melo, 2015. "Pressure ulcer risk assessment: retrospective analysis of Braden Scale scores in Portuguese hospitalised adult patients," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(21-22), pages 3165-3176, November.
    2. Tove E Børsting & Christine R Tvedt & Ingrid J Skogestad & Tove I Granheim & Caryl L Gay & Anners Lerdal, 2018. "Prevalence of pressure ulcer and associated risk factors in middle‐ and older‐aged medical inpatients in Norway," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3-4), pages 535-543, February.
    3. Ivan Mwebaza & Godfrey Katende & Sara Groves & Joyce Nankumbi, 2014. "Nurses’ Knowledge, Practices, and Barriers in Care of Patients with Pressure Ulcers in a Ugandan Teaching Hospital," Nursing Research and Practice, Hindawi, vol. 2014, pages 1-6, February.
    4. Dana Tschannen & Christine Anderson, 2020. "The pressure injury predictive model: A framework for hospital‐acquired pressure injuries," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(7-8), pages 1398-1421, April.
    5. Seyma Adibelli & Fatos Korkmaz, 2019. "Pressure injury risk assessment in intensive care units: Comparison of the reliability and predictive validity of the Braden and Jackson/Cubbin scales," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(23-24), pages 4595-4605, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:27:y:2018:i:6:p:643-659. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.