Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Avicenna J Med 2024; 14(01): 039-044
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1777420
Original Article

Prediction Pressure Ulcers in High Care Unit Patients: Evaluating Risk Factors and Predictive Scale Using a Prospective Cross-Sectional Study

Anies Dewi Wirati Indraswari
1   Intensive Care Unit, Fatmawati Hospital, Cilandak – South Jakarta, Indonesia
,
Umi Aisyiyah
2   Committee of Nursing, Fatmawati Hospital, Cilandak - South Jakarta, Indonesia
,
Kurniawan Kurniawan
1   Intensive Care Unit, Fatmawati Hospital, Cilandak – South Jakarta, Indonesia
,
Meircurius Dwi Condro Surboyo 
3   Department of Oral Medicine, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Universitas Airlangga, Indonesia
› Author Affiliations Funding The study was funded by Fatmawati Hospital, Jakarta in 2021 and Emergency Department Fatmawati Hospital, Jakarta for their support to this study.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background The incidence of ulcer pressure in the high care unit (HCU) was relatively high and could be reliably predicted using tools such as the Norton and Jackson/Cubbin scales. However, other risk factors, such as age, gender, consciousness, systemic condition, duration of treatment, and use of restraint, may contribute to the occurrence of ulcer pressure. This study was conducted to analyze the relationship of various risk factors for pressure ulcers and prediction of ulcer pressure, using Norton and Jackson/Cubbin scale, to incident pressure ulcers in HCU patient.

Methods This study utilized a prospective cross-sectional study design to analyze various risk factors for ulcer pressure development in a patient admitted to the HCU, including age, gender, blood profile, consciousness, duration of treatment, and use of restraint. The Norton and Jackson/Cubbin scale was employed to predict pressure ulcers. The relationship between the risk factors and the prediction of pressure ulcer incidents was evaluated using multiple logistic binary regression analysis.

Result Both the Norton and Jackson/Cubbin scales predicted a lower risk of pressure ulcer development (60.98 and 99.02%, respectively). This prediction is consistent with the low incidence of pressure injuries found, which is only 4.39%. Furthermore, the relationship between the identified risk factor (gender, duration of treatment in HCU and use of restraint) and the prediction and incident of pressure ulcer was not significant (p > 0.05). Thus, it is suggested that these risk factors may not strong predictors of pressure ulcer development.

Conclusion This study's result indicated no significant relationship exists between possible identified risk factors and the development of pressure ulcers in HCU patients. However, the Norton and Jackson/Cubbin scales were reliable predictors of pressure ulcer occurrence, with both scales predicting a lower risk of pressure ulcer development.

Keywords

pressure ulcer - high care unit - prediction - risk factor - Norton - Jackson/Cubbin

Ethical Approval

This research has been approved by the Ethics Committee and Bagian Pendidikan dan Penelitian (DIKLIT)—Fatmawati Hospital with registered number 01.01/VII.2/418/2020.




Publication History

Article published online:
27 February 2024

© 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Mansfield S, Obraczka K, Roy S. Pressure injury prevention: a survey. IEEE Rev Biomed Eng 2020; 13: 352-368
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Mervis JS, Phillips TJ. Pressure ulcers: prevention and management. J Am Acad Dermatol 2019; 81 (04) 893-902
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Mervis JS, Phillips TJ. Pressure ulcers: pathophysiology, epidemiology, risk factors, and presentation. J Am Acad Dermatol 2019; 81 (04) 881-890
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Barakat-Johnson M, Lai M, Wand T, Li M, White K, Coyer F. The incidence and prevalence of medical device-related pressure ulcers in intensive care: a systematic review. J Wound Care 2019; 28 (08) 512-521
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Kim J, Lyon D, Weaver MT, Keenan G, Stechmiller J. Demographics, psychological distress, and pain from pressure injury. Nurs Res 2019; 68 (05) 339-347
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Moore Z, Patton D, Avsar P. et al. Prevention of pressure ulcers among individuals cared for in the prone position: lessons for the COVID-19 emergency. J Wound Care 2020; 29 (06) 312-320
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Padula WV, Pronovost PJ, Makic MBF. et al. Value of hospital resources for effective pressure injury prevention: a cost-effectiveness analysis. BMJ Qual Saf 2019; 28 (02) 132-141
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Hu L, Sae-Sia W, Kitrungrote L. Predictors of pressure injury prevention practices among ICU nurses in China. Adv Skin Wound Care 2021; 34 (11) 582-587
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Teo CSM, Claire CA, Lopez V, Shorey S. Pressure injury prevention and management practices among nurses: a realist case study. Int Wound J 2019; 16 (01) 153-163
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Cowan L, Broderick V, Alderden JG. Pressure injury prevention considerations for older adults. Crit Care Nurs Clin North Am 2020; 32 (04) 601-609
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Huang C, Ma Y, Wang C. et al. Predictive validity of the Braden scale for pressure injury risk assessment in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nurs Open 2021; 8 (05) 2194-2207
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Shi HY, Chen HL. Optimized Norton scale for pressure injury risk assessment: need for additional predictive validity analysis. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs 2021; 48 (02) 174-175
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Sullivan R, Barnby E, Graham S. Evaluation of a modified version of the Norton scale for use as a pressure injury risk assessment instrument in critical care: a quality improvement project. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs 2020; 47 (03) 224-229
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Higgins J, Casey S, Taylor E, Wilson R, Halcomb P. Comparing the Braden and Jackson/Cubbin pressure injury risk scales in trauma-surgery ICU patients. Crit Care Nurse 2020; 40 (06) 52-61
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Gurkan A, Kirtil I, Aydin YD, Kutuk G. Pressure injuries in surgical patients: a comparison of Norton, Braden and Waterlow risk assessment scales. J Wound Care 2022; 31 (02) 170-177
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Theeranut A, Ninbanphot S, Limpawattana P. Comparison of four pressure ulcer risk assessment tools in critically ill patients. Nurs Crit Care 2021; 26 (01) 48-54
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Díaz-Caro I, García Gómez-Heras S. Incidence of hospital-acquired pressure ulcers in patients with “minimal risk” according to the “Norton-MI” scale. PLoS One 2020; 15 (01) e0227052
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Rabinovitz E, Finkelstein A, Ben Assa E. et al. Norton scale for predicting prognosis in elderly patients undergoing trans-catheter aortic valve implantation: a historical prospective study. J Cardiol 2016; 67 (06) 519-525
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 López M, Jiménez JM, Fernández M, Martín B, Cao MJ, Castro MJ. Relationship between pressure ulcer risk based on Norton Scale and on the “Eating/Drinking” need assessment. J Nurs Manag 2019; 27 (01) 117-124
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Delawder JM, Leontie SL, Maduro RS, Morgan MK, Zimbro KS. Predictive validity of the Cubbin-Jackson and Braden skin risk tools in critical care patients: a multisite project. Am J Crit Care 2021; 30 (02) 140-144
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Ahtiala MH, Kivimäki R, Laitio R, Soppi ET. The Association Between pressure ulcer/injury development and short-term mortality in critically ill patients: a retrospective cohort study. Wound Manag Prev 2020; 66 (02) 14-21
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Ladios-Martin M, Fernández-de-Maya J, Ballesta-López FJ, Belso-Garzas A, Mas-Asencio M, Cabañero-Martínez MJ. Predictive modeling of pressure injury risk in patients admitted to an intensive care unit. Am J Crit Care 2020; 29 (04) e70-e80
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Kim E, Choi M, Lee J, Kim YA. Reusability of EMR data for applying cubbin and Jackson pressure ulcer risk assessment scale in critical care patients. Healthc Inform Res 2013; 19 (04) 261-270
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Lewko J, Demianiuk M, Krot E. et al. Assessment of risk for pressure ulcers using the Norton scale in nursing practice. Rocz Akad Med Bialymst 2005; 50 (Suppl. 01) 148-151
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Ahtiala MH, Soppi E, Kivimäki R. Critical Evaluation of the Jackson/Cubbin pressure ulcer risk scale - a secondary analysis of a retrospective cohort study population of intensive care patients. Ostomy Wound Manage 2016; 62 (02) 24-33
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Lospitao-Gómez S, Sebastián-Viana T, González-Ruíz JM, Álvarez-Rodríguez J. Validity of the current risk assessment scale for pressure ulcers in intensive care (EVARUCI) and the Norton-MI scale in critically ill patients. Appl Nurs Res 2017; 38: 76-82
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Šateková L, Žiaková K, Zeleníková R. Predictive validity of the Braden Scale, Norton Scale, and Waterlow Scale in the Czech Republic. Int J Nurs Pract 2017; 23 (01) e12499
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Adibelli S, Korkmaz F. Pressure injury risk assessment in intensive care units: comparison of the reliability and predictive validity of the Braden and Jackson/Cubbin scales. J Clin Nurs 2019; 28 (23-24): 4595-4605
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Sousa B. Translation, adaptation, and validation of the Sunderland Scale and the Cubbin & Jackson Revised Scale in Portuguese. Rev Bras Ter Intensiva 2013; 25 (02) 106-114
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Ahtiala M, Laitio R, Soppi E. Therapeutic hypothermia and pressure ulcer risk in critically ill intensive care patients: a retrospective study. Intensive Crit Care Nurs 2018; 46: 80-85
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Wei M, Wu L, Chen Y, Fu Q, Chen W, Yang D. Predictive validity of the Braden scale for pressure ulcer risk in critical care: a meta-analysis. Nurs Crit Care 2020; 25 (03) 165-170
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Ben Asher Kestin S, Israel A, Leshem E. et al. Can the Norton scale score be used as an adjunct tool for implantable defibrillator patient selection? A retrospective single-center cohort study. J Clin Med 2022; 12 (01) 214
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Asleh K, Sever R, Hilu S. et al. Association between low admission Norton scale scores and postoperative complications after elective THA in elderly patients. Orthopedics 2012; 35 (09) e1302-e1306
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Guy N, Lerman Y, Justo D. Admission Norton scale scores (ANSS) correlate with rehabilitation outcome and length in elderly patients with deconditioning. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2012; 54 (02) 381-384
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Chung ML, Widdel M, Kirchhoff J. et al. Risk factors for pressure injuries in adult patients: a narrative synthesis. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2022; 19 (02) 761
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Lima Serrano M, González Méndez MI, Carrasco Cebollero FM, Lima Rodríguez JS. Risk factors for pressure ulcer development in intensive care units: a systematic review. Med Intensiva (Madrid) 2017; 41 (06) 339-346
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Dang W, Liu Y, Zhou Q. et al. Risk factors of medical device-related pressure injury in intensive care units. J Clin Nurs 2022; 31 (9-10): 1174-1183
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Latimer S, Chaboyer W, Thalib L, McInnes E, Bucknall T, Gillespie BM. Pressure injury prevalence and predictors among older adults in the first 36 hours of hospitalisation. J Clin Nurs 2019; 28 (21-22): 4119-4127
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Qin Z, Wang Y, Zhao W. et al. Pressure ulcer healing promoted by adequate protein intake in rats. Exp Ther Med 2018; 15 (05) 4173-4178
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Kachekouche Y, Dali-Sahi M, Benmansour D, Dennouni-Medjati N. Hematological profile associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Metab Syndr 2018; 12 (03) 309-312
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar