IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v29y2020i7-8p1398-1421.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The pressure injury predictive model: A framework for hospital‐acquired pressure injuries

Author

Listed:
  • Dana Tschannen
  • Christine Anderson

Abstract

Background Despite decades of research, pressure injuries continue to be a source of significant pain and delayed recovery for patients and substantial quality and cost issues for hospitals. Consideration of the current thinking around pressure injury risk must be evaluated to improve risk assessments and subsequent nursing interventions aimed at reducing hospital‐acquired pressure injuries. Design This is a discursive paper using Walker and Avant’s (2005) theory synthesis framework to examine the relevance of existing pressure injury models as they align with the current literature. Methods PubMed and CINAHL indexes were searched, first for conceptual models and then for pressure injury research conducted on hospitalised patients for the years 2006–2016. A synthesis of the searches culminated into a new pressure injury risk model. Conclusions Gaps in previous models include lack of attention to the environment, contributing episode‐of‐care factors and the dynamic nature of injury risk for patients. Through theory synthesis, the need for a new model representing the full risk for pressure injury was identified. The Pressure Injury Predictive Model is a representation of the complex and dynamic nature of pressure injury risk that builds on previous models and addresses new patient, contextual and episode‐of‐care process influences. The Pressure Injury Predictive Model (PIPM) provides a more accurate picture of the complexity of contextual and process factors associated with pressure injury development. Relevance to Clinical Practice Using the PIPM to determine risk can result in improved risk identification. This information can be used to implement targeted, evidence‐based pressure injury prevention interventions specific to the patient risk profile, thus limiting unwarranted and unnecessary care.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:29:y:2020:i:7-8:p:1398-1421
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.15171
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15171
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.15171?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. Toshiko Kaitani & Keiko Tokunaga & Noriko Matsui & Hiromi Sanada, 2010. "Risk factors related to the development of pressure ulcers in the critical care setting," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3‐4), pages 414-421, February.
    2. 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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. María Isabel González‐Méndez & Marta Lima‐Serrano & Catalina Martín‐Castaño & Inmaculada Alonso‐Araujo & Joaquín Salvador Lima‐Rodríguez, 2018. "Incidence and risk factors associated with the development of pressure ulcers in an intensive care unit," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(5-6), pages 1028-1037, March.
    5. Khadijeh Hoviattalab & Haydeh Hashemizadeh & Gibson D'Cruz & Ruud JG Halfens & Theo Dassen, 2015. "Nursing practice in the prevention of pressure ulcers: an observational study of German Hospitals," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(11-12), pages 1513-1524, June.
    6. 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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:jocnur:v:29:y:2020:i:7-8:p:1398-1421. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    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.