Each year, more than 2.5 million people in the United States develop pressure ulcers. These skin lesions bring pain, associated risk for serious infection, and increased health care utilization. Moreover, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid (CMS) no longer provides additional reimbursement to hospitals to care for a patient who has acquired a pressure ulcer while under the hospital's care. Thus, pressure ulcer prevention presents an important challenge in acute care hospitals. A number of best practices have been shown to be effective in reducing the occurrence of pressure ulcers, but these practices are not used systematically in all hospitals. The Challenges of Pressure Ulcer Prevention Pressure ulcer prevention requires an interdisciplinary approach to care. Some parts of pressure ulcer prevention care are highly routinized, but care must also be tailored to the specific risk profile of each patient. No individual clinician working alone, regardless of how talented, can prevent all pressure ulcers from developing. Rather, pressure ulcer prevention requires activities among many individuals, including the multiple disciplines and multiple teams involved in developing and implementing the care plan. To accomplish this coordination, high-quality prevention requires an organizational culture and operational practices that promote teamwork and communication, as well as individual expertise. Therefore, improvement in pressure ulcer prevention calls for a system focus to make needed changes. Toolkit Designed for Multiple Audiences The aim of this toolkit is to assist hospital staff in implementing effective pressure ulcer prevention practices. The toolkit was developed under a contract with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality through the ACTION program (Accelerating Change and Transformation in Organizations and Networks), with additional support from the Health Services Research and Development Service of the Department of Veterans Affairs. It was created by a core team with expertise in pressure ulcers and organizational change at the Boston University School of Public Health. An expert advisory panel and quality improvement teams at six participating medical centers provided input. The toolkit's content draws on literature on best practices in pressure ulcer prevention and includes both validated and newly developed tools. The toolkit was tested in the six participating medical centers. Their feedback influenced this final version and their experiences are reflected in many of the examples provided.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this work was to reduce the number of hospital-acquired pressure injuries on the nasal bridge resulting from the use of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and bilevel positive airway pressure (BiPAP) therapy. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Patients with medical device–related pressure injuries (MDRPI) receiving continuous/intermittent CPAP/BiPAP in a 12-bed critical care unit in a Magnet-designated, 182-bed community hospital in the mid-Atlantic region of the United States. APPROACH: An interprofessional team collaborated to assess factors contributing to an increase in MDRPI development in critical care unit patients using CPAP/BiPAP. Patient dependency on the high-pressurized oxygen results in nurse reluctance to remove the mask and consequently, conduct a partial or incomplete skin assessment. The project consisted of conducting a literature search on MDRPI, developing a standard work process for skin assessment and documentation in the medical record, using skin protection under the mask, and evaluating whether a different model of mask would minimize pressure on the nasal bridge. OUTCOMES: Through active collaboration, the interprofessional team implemented standard work processes, completed product evaluation of masks, and monitored key process indicators related to documentation of daily and every 4-hour skin assessments, implementation of a thin foam dressing under the CPAP/BiPAP mask for any nonblanchable or blanchable erythema, and escalation to the certified wound, ostomy, and continence nurse. In 2016, the unit identified 4 CPAP/BiPAP mask-related MDRPIs. By December 2017, only 1 stage 1 injury was identified and it resolved quickly after appropriate assessment and prompt interventions. This showed a 75% reduction in actual injuries with a zero escalation to stage 2 or greater injuries. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: An interprofessional team approach to CPAP/BiPAP-related MDRPI improved patient outcomes in critical care unit patients.