Prophylactic Sacral Dressing for Pressure Ulcer Prevention in High-Risk Patients

Byrne, Jaime; Nichols, Patricia; Sroczynski, Marzena; Stelmaski, Laurie; Stetzer, Molly; Line, Cynthia; Carlin, Kristen

doi:10.4037/ajcc2016979

Cited by 27 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The use of such dressings also offers a tangible presence as a reminder to healthcare professionals of the need for PI prevention. 39 With these dressings increasingly being used in clinical practice, 8,41,42 further high-quality studies are needed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence of pressure injury in adults presenting to the emergency department by ambulance

Fulbrook

Miles

Coyer

2019

Australian Critical Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Pressure injuries are harmful, painful, and potentially preventable. Although hospital-acquired pressure injury prevalence is decreasing, it is unclear if some pressure injuries develop before hospital admission. The objective of this study was to investigate the prevalence of pressure injury in adults on arrival by ambulance to the emergency department (ED). Methods: An observational, cross-sectional descriptive study design was used. Participants (n ¼ 212) were recruited from the EDs of two Australian tertiary hospitals. Full skin inspection and pressure injury risk assessment, using Braden and Waterlow scores, were undertaken within 1 h of presentation. Results: Pressure injuries were identified in 11 of 212 participants, giving a prevalence of 5.2% at presentation. Nearly all were admitted to hospital, giving a prevalence of 7.8% at this entry point. Participants with pressure injury and those at high risk of injury were found to have spent longer in the ambulance and within the ED. During ambulance transport and in the first hour of presentation to the ED, it was rare that pressure-relieving interventions were implemented, even for those with an identified pressure injury and those at high risk. Conclusions: The results indicate that early pressure injury surveillance and risk assessment are merited at the point of presentation to the ED, so that prevention and treatment can be implemented at the earliest possible opportunity. Although it is more challenging to manage pressure injuries within the ambulance and ED, the use of pressure-relieving devices should be considered for those at greatest risk. Further research is recommended.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence of pressure injury in adults presenting to the emergency department by ambulance

Fulbrook

Miles

Coyer

2019

Australian Critical Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The prophylactic dressing was also effective in preventing PIs in previously reported research studies. 4,6,11,[18][19][20] This finding suggests that using the silicone adhesive dressing as a prophylactic dressing may reduce the development of PIs and prevent blanching erythema from progressing to stage 1 PI.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Use of prophylactic silicone adhesive dressings for maintaining skin integrity in intensive care unit patients: A randomised controlled trial

Lee

Kim

Shin

2019

International Wound Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aims of this randomised controlled study were to determine whether the application of silicone adhesive dressings with standard preventive care would reduce the impairment of skin integrity and to evaluate the subepidermal moisture (SEM) value in anatomical locations to predict impairment of skin integrity. Of the 71 intensive care unit patients enrolled, 35 and 31 were randomly assigned to the intervention and control groups, respectively. The SEM value was measured at each site (the coccyx, sacrum, and both buttocks) repeatedly three times at every dressing change. Collected data were analysed by multivariate linear regression, and least square means analysis was used to compare the SEM value at the sites of pressure injury (PI) and blanching erythema. There were fewer PIs (1 vs 9) and incidences of blanching erythema (5 vs 6) in the intervention group than in the control group (P = 0.006). The SEM value and difference of the SEM value from the initial value was higher in the group with PIs than in the group without PIs (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.001, respectively). There was a statistically significant difference in the incidence of impaired skin integrity between the groups. The SEM value may be an indicator for detecting impairment of skin integrity.

show abstract

“…In this case, more nursing time was required and patients were subjected to pain and anxiety that had substantial impacts on quality of life. It has been reported that solid medical devices create more friction and are more likely to trigger pressure ulcers, even MDR PUs (injuries develop when underlying tissue are subjected to a sustained pressure or shear from medical devices) [10][11][12], and foam dressings are now recommended by pressure ulcers prevention guideline to relieve pressure so as to protect the skin [6,[13][14].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mepilex Border Dressings for the Prevention of Pressure Ulcers Caused by Nephrostomy Tube Securement

Yang¹,

Guo²

2020

SJCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To investigate the clinical effectiveness of Mepilex Border dressings for the prevention of medical device-related pressure ulcers (MDR PUs) caused by the nephrostomy tube securement with the drainage tube. Methods: Equally randomized 60 obstructive hydronephrosis patients in our hospital who were treated by ultrasound-guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy (from March 2018 to March 2019) into observation group and control group. The observation group was applied dressings beneath the junctions of nephrostomy tubes and drainage tubes before secured with 5*5cm I-shaped 3M elastic adhesive tape to avoid direct contact to patients' skin; the control group was only secured with 5*5cm I-shaped 3M elastic adhesive tape to the bare skin. The incidences of skin indentations, local pain and pressure ulcers under the junctions were compared between two groups. Results: There were statistical significance (P<0.05) among two groups: all patients in control group (n=30) were presented with skin indentations in different degrees, 21 with local pain, 6 with first-stage pressure ulcers, while no evidence of the above situations was found in the observation group. Conclusions: Application of Mepilex Border dressings can prevent the occurrence of MDR PUs to improve patient comfort.

show abstract

Prophylactic Sacral Dressing for Pressure Ulcer Prevention in High-Risk Patients

Cited by 27 publications

References 5 publications

Prevalence of pressure injury in adults presenting to the emergency department by ambulance

Prevalence of pressure injury in adults presenting to the emergency department by ambulance

Use of prophylactic silicone adhesive dressings for maintaining skin integrity in intensive care unit patients: A randomised controlled trial

Mepilex Border Dressings for the Prevention of Pressure Ulcers Caused by Nephrostomy Tube Securement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About