OBJECTIVE To explore the experience of incontinence-associated dermatitis (IAD) as perceived by nurses, obstacles in the nursing process, and need for IAD training and management. METHODS This single-setting descriptive qualitative study was conducted from June 5, 2018, to June 22, 2018. Ten nurses working in the respiratory ICU of a local hospital participated in semistructured interviews. The content analysis method was used to analyze, summarize, and refine the interview data. RESULTS The experience of ICU nurses with IAD can be divided into four types: nursing based on experiential knowledge, seeking self-improvement, disunity of cleaning methods and wiping skills, and postponement of nursing care because of priority allocation. Obstacles in the nursing process include a lack of relevant nursing knowledge and awareness, as well as the medical supplies needed. The goals of training and management include establishing IAD preventive nursing procedures, providing IAD care products, enhancing the practicality of training content and diversifying training methods, and establishing an information system to assist nurses caring for patients with IAD. CONCLUSIONS The knowledge and behavior of ICU nurses regarding IAD need to be improved. Training and management are imperative. Facilities and nurse managers should actively seek solutions to stated obstacles, formulate training methods suitable for clinical needs, and promote the standardization of nursing for IAD.

The objectives of this study were to describe the nutritional status of Chinese patients with gastrointestinal cancer undergoing surgery and to compare the ease of use, diversity, and concordance of the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 with the Subjective Global Assessment in the same patients. A total of 280 gastrointestinal cancer patients admitted for elective surgery were evaluated by the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS 2002) and Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) tools within 48 hours of admission from April to October 2012. Related opinions about ease of using the tools were obtained from 10 nurses. The prevalence of patients at nutritional risk with the SGA and NRS 2002 was 33.9% and 53.2% on admission. In the total group, ≤70 age group, and >70 age group, respectively, consistency was observed in 214 (76.4%), 175 (91.1%), and 39 (44.3%); and kappa values were 0.54 (p < .001), 0.81 (p < .001), and 0.085 (p = .096). McNemar paired chi-square test showed a significant difference between the NRS 2002 and SGA in the total group and >70 age group (p < .001); however, no difference was observed in the ≤70 age group (p = .14). Nurses reported ease of use of the NRS 2002 as a "very easy" or "easy" to complete (3-5 minutes) and the SGA as an "easy" or "fair" tool to complete (5-10 minutes). The diversity and concordance between the SGA and NRS 2002 were varied in different age groups. The NRS 2002 is more suitable in nursing practice than the SGA to identify the nutritional status of patients with gastrointestinal cancer undergoing surgery, but it appeared to detect more patients at nutritional risk in the >70 age group.