Pressure lesion monitoring – data set validation after second pilot data collection

Česká verze

Authors: A. Pokorná ¹; J. Mužík ¹; P. Búřilová ¹; S. Saibertová ¹; L. Kubátová T. Kelbich ^{2 3}; E. Koblihová ²; N. Müllerová ⁴; P. Camprová ⁵; D. Svobodová ⁶
Authors place of work: Katedra ošetřovatelství, LF MU, Brno ¹; Chirurgická klinika ÚVN – VFN Praha ²; Oddělení řízení kvality zdravotní péče, ÚVN – VFN Praha ³; Centrum řízení kvality, FN Plzeň ⁴; I. chirurgická klinika VFN Praha ⁵; Úsek pro nelékařská zdravotnická povolání, VFN Praha ⁶
Published in the journal: Cesk Slov Neurol N 2018; 81(Suplementum 1): 6-12
Category: Původní práce
doi: https://doi.org/10.14735/amcsnn2018S6

Summary

Aim:

To present the validation process of the data standard for the collection of data on pressure ulcers and, in particular, to identify the necessary and unnecessary items that should be monitored at the local level of the health service providers. On the contrary, the aim is not to compare the number of records of pressure ulcers and occurrence of pressure ulcers, but to assess the possibility of data collection in clinical practice and to assess their usability in relation to the measures necessary for the provision of care.

Methodology:

Second pilot validation of the dataset was carried out in three participating university hospitals (centres) in the Czech Republic for a period of 6 months (2^nd half of 2017). The first pre-pilot validation was organised in the previous 6 months. Statistical analysis of data was performed in SPSS (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) at a significance level of 0.05.

Results:

In total, data from 320 records of patients were submitted from all three centres, with 310 completed history records and 498 records of pressure ulcers. There were no statistically significant differences in data availability and completion of the standardized data set in the required structure (p > 0.05). Based on an assessment of the administrative burden and the clinical benefit of the data, changes were made to the final data standard.

Conclusion:

The prepared technical description of the standardized and validated dataset together with the technical description of the software will allow simple implementation at national level to unify the special dataset for monitoring of pressure ulcers.

Key words:

pressure ulcers monitoring –⁠ uniform assessment –⁠ nursing education –⁠ data collection –⁠ validaton

The authors declare they have no potential conflicts of interest concerning drugs, products, or services used in the study.

The Editorial Board declares that the manuscript met the ICMJE “uniform requirements” for biomedical papers.

Zdroje

1. Collier M. Pressure ulcer incidence: the development and benefits of 10 year’s-experience with an electronic monitoring tool (PUNT) in a UK Hospital Trust. EWMA Journal 2015; 15(2): 15 –⁠ 20.

2. Pokorná A, Benešová K, Mužík J et al. Sledování dekubitálních lézí u pacientů s neurologickým onemocněním –⁠ analýza Národního registru hospitalizovaných. Cesk Slov Neurol N 2016; 79/ 111 (Suppl 1): S8 –⁠ S14. doi: 10.14735/ amcsnn2016S8.

3. Pokorná A, Saibertová S, Vasmanská S et al. Registers of pressure ulcers in an international context. Cent Eur J Nurs Midwifery 2016; 7(2): 444 –⁠ 452. doi: 10.15452/ CEJNM.2016.07.0013.

4. Pokorná A, Benešová K, Jarkovský J et al. Pressure injuries in inpatient care facilities in the Czech Republic. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs 2017; 44(4): 331 –⁠ 335. doi: 10.1097/ WON.0000000000000344.

5. Gunningberg L, Hommel A, Bååth C et al. The first national PU prevalence survey in county council and municipality settings in Sweden. J Eval Clin Pract 2013; 19(5): 862 –⁠ 867. doi: 10.1111/ j.1365-2753.2012.01865.x.

6. Demarré L, Van Lancker A, Van Hecke A et al. The cost of prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers: a systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud 2015; 52(11): 1754 –⁠ 1774. doi: 10.1016/ j.ijnurstu.2015.06.006.

7. Demarré L, Verhaeghe S, Annemans L et al. The cost of pressure ulcer prevention and treatment in hospitals and nursing homes in Flanders: a cost-of-illness study. Int J Nurs Stud 2015; 52(7): 1166 –⁠ 1179. doi: 10.1016/ j.ijnurstu.2015.03.005.

8. Pokorná A, Jarkovský J, Mužík J et al. A new online software tool for pressure ulcer monitoring as an educational instrument for unified nursing assessment in clinical settings. MEFANET Journal 2016; 4(1): 26 –⁠ 32.

9. Alhaug J, Gay CL, Henriksen C et al. Pressure ulcer is associated with malnutrition as assessed by Nutritional Risk Screening (NRS 2002) in a mixed hospital population. Food Nutr Res 2017; 61(1): 1324230. doi: 10.1080/ 16546628.2017.1324230.

10. Jeong M K, Hyunjeong L, Taehoon H et al. Perioperative factors associated with pressure ulcer development after major surgery. Korean J Anesthesiol 2018; 71(1): 48 –⁠ 56. doi: 10.4097/ kjae.2018.71.1.48.

11. Hong-Lin Ch, Xiao-Yan C, Juan W. The incidence of pressure ulcers in surgical patients of the last 5 years: a systematic review. Wounds 2012; 24(9): 234 –⁠ 241.

12. Schoonhoven L, Defloor T, Grypdonck MH. Incidence of pressure ulcers due to surgery. J Clin Nurs 2002; 11(4): 479 –⁠ 487.

13. Kottner J, Balzer K. Do pressure ulcer risk assessment scales improve clinical practice? J Multidiscip Healthc 2010; 3(3): 103 –⁠ 111. doi: 10.2147/ JMDH.S9286.

14. Mitchell I, Schuster A, Smith K et al. Patient safety incident reporting: a qualitative study of thoughts and perceptions of experts 15 years after ‚To Err is Human‘. BMJ Qual Saf 2016; 25(2): 92 –⁠ 99. doi: 10.1136/ bmjqs-2015-004405.

15. Stavropoulou C, Doherty C, Tosey P. How effective are incident-reporting systems for improving patient safety? A systematic literature review. Milbank Q 2015; 93(4): 826 –⁠ 866. doi: 10.1111/ 1468-0009.12166.

16. De Veer AJ, Franke AL. Attitudes of nursing staff towards electronic patient records: a questionnaire survey. Int J Nurs Stud 2010; 47(7): 846 –⁠ 854. doi: 10.1016/ j.ijnurstu.2009.11.016.

17. Stevenson JE, Nilsson GC, Peterson GI et al. Nurses experience of using electronic patient records in everyday practice in acute/ inpatient ward settings: a literature review. Health Informatics J 2010; 16(1): 63 –⁠ 72. doi: 10.1177/ 1460458209345901.

18. Li J, Westbrook J, Callen, J et al. The role of ICT in supporting the disruptive innovation: a multisite qualitative study of nurse practitioners in emergency departments. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2012; 12 : 27. doi: 10.1186/ 1472-6947-12-27.