2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/165858
Category:
Abstract
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Outcomes from a heel pressure ulcer prevention program
Author(s):
Gilcreast, Darlene
Author Details:
Darlene Gilcreast, Assistant Professor, Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, USA, email: gilcreast@uthscsa.edu
Abstract:
PURPOSE: This study compared three pressure reduction devices for their effects on preventing heel pressure ulcers for moderate to high-risk patients, using the Braden Pressure Sore Risk Scale. The research questions were: 1. What is the incidence of heel pressure ulcers in hospitalized acutely ill patients? 2. Are characteristics different between subjects who do/do not develop pressure ulcers? 3. What factors/characteristics predict who will/will not develop heel pressure ulcers? 4. Which of the three heel pressure ulcer prevention devices is most clinically effective and most cost-effective? METHODS: A prospective, quasi-experimental three-group design was used. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to a polyester fleece bootie, a polyurethane "Heel Lift Protector," or an EHOB air-waffle boot after informed consent was obtained. Data collected included demographic characteristics of the sample, skin assessments, Braden Scores, comorbidities, length of stay, and costs associated with the pressure relief device used. The sample consisted of 240 adult inpatients assessed as "moderate to high-risk" for heel pressure ulcer development. Most patients were: >60 years old, immobile, incontinent, and located in a critical care unit for part of their hospitalization. Data were entered in SPSS and analyzed using measures of central tendency and discriminant techniques. FINDINGS: The incidence of heel pressure ulcers in this study was 5% over a three-year period or <2% per year. A total of 12 pressure ulcers developed in 240 subjects. Of these 12 pressure ulcers, 11 were Stage I (nonblanchable erythema) and 1 was Stage II (partial thickness). The incidence of heel pressure ulcers was not statistically significantly different between the three devices (X2<1, p>0.10). The heel ulcer incidence rate was 3.9% for the polyester fleece bootie, 4.6% for the polyurethane foam Heel Lift Positioner, and 6.6% for the EHOB air-waffle boot. Patient compliance with wearing the devices was similar across groups. Subjects who developed pressure ulcers were compliant in wearing the devices 88% of the time. Patients who were most likely to develop heel ulcers had: constant moisture to the area, pedal edema, diabetes and hypertension comorbidities, a history of smoking, and were immobile. Costs among prevention devices were significantly different. IMPLICATIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS: This study demonstrated that for most moderate to high-risk patients, a low tech, less expensive heel pressure relief device is as effective as high-tech heel pressure relief devices. The most cost effect pressure relief is supported by vigilant nursing care and repeated nursing skin care assessments.
Repository Posting Date:
27-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
27-Oct-2011
Conference Host:
Southern Nursing Research Society
Note:
This is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.type.categoryAbstracten_US
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleOutcomes from a heel pressure ulcer prevention programen_GB
dc.contributor.authorGilcreast, Darleneen_US
dc.author.detailsDarlene Gilcreast, Assistant Professor, Brooke Army Medical Center, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, USA, email: gilcreast@uthscsa.eduen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/165858-
dc.description.abstractPURPOSE: This study compared three pressure reduction devices for their effects on preventing heel pressure ulcers for moderate to high-risk patients, using the Braden Pressure Sore Risk Scale. The research questions were: 1. What is the incidence of heel pressure ulcers in hospitalized acutely ill patients? 2. Are characteristics different between subjects who do/do not develop pressure ulcers? 3. What factors/characteristics predict who will/will not develop heel pressure ulcers? 4. Which of the three heel pressure ulcer prevention devices is most clinically effective and most cost-effective? METHODS: A prospective, quasi-experimental three-group design was used. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to a polyester fleece bootie, a polyurethane "Heel Lift Protector," or an EHOB air-waffle boot after informed consent was obtained. Data collected included demographic characteristics of the sample, skin assessments, Braden Scores, comorbidities, length of stay, and costs associated with the pressure relief device used. The sample consisted of 240 adult inpatients assessed as "moderate to high-risk" for heel pressure ulcer development. Most patients were: >60 years old, immobile, incontinent, and located in a critical care unit for part of their hospitalization. Data were entered in SPSS and analyzed using measures of central tendency and discriminant techniques. FINDINGS: The incidence of heel pressure ulcers in this study was 5% over a three-year period or <2% per year. A total of 12 pressure ulcers developed in 240 subjects. Of these 12 pressure ulcers, 11 were Stage I (nonblanchable erythema) and 1 was Stage II (partial thickness). The incidence of heel pressure ulcers was not statistically significantly different between the three devices (X2<1, p>0.10). The heel ulcer incidence rate was 3.9% for the polyester fleece bootie, 4.6% for the polyurethane foam Heel Lift Positioner, and 6.6% for the EHOB air-waffle boot. Patient compliance with wearing the devices was similar across groups. Subjects who developed pressure ulcers were compliant in wearing the devices 88% of the time. Patients who were most likely to develop heel ulcers had: constant moisture to the area, pedal edema, diabetes and hypertension comorbidities, a history of smoking, and were immobile. Costs among prevention devices were significantly different. IMPLICATIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS: This study demonstrated that for most moderate to high-risk patients, a low tech, less expensive heel pressure relief device is as effective as high-tech heel pressure relief devices. The most cost effect pressure relief is supported by vigilant nursing care and repeated nursing skin care assessments.en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-27T14:35:11Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-27en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-27T14:35:11Z-
dc.conference.hostSouthern Nursing Research Societyen_US
dc.description.noteThis is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.-
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.