Improvements were seen for symptom scores over the study period. However, presuming these improvements were caused by the individualized homeopathic approach, the study failed to show clearly that the specific effect of the remedy added further to the nonspecific effects of the consultation. Future trial design must ensure adequate power to account for the nonspecific impact of such complex individualized interventions while pragmatic designs may more readily answer questions of clinical and cost effectiveness.

Summary This paper critiques pressure sore risk assessment tools. No attempt is made to describe individual tools in detail as this literature is available elsewhere. The economic case for risk assessment is presented along with the criteria for an effective risk assessment instrument. Reliability and validity studies are reviewed in relation to three risk assessment tools: Norton, Waterlow and Braden. Finally a number of issues related to threshold scores, research design and the need to view pressure sores as a clinical problem rather than a nursing problem are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract