The development of pressure sores in patients with spinal cord injury

Graham, Alan

doi:10.12968/jowc.1997.6.8.393

Cited by 6 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Pressure sores have a multifactorial aetiology 3 and despite the education offered to SCI individuals and their carers during rehabilitation, and the development of increasingly sophisticated pressure relief devices, they remain a common complication of both acute and chronic spinal cord injury. 4,5 The risk of pressure sores in the SCI population is much greater than in the general population; 15 major risk factors and in excess of 50 additional risk factors have been identified for pressure sores after SCI.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A specialist seating assessment clinic: changing pressure relief practice

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Study design: Description of a clinical service, evaluation of pressure relief practices. Objectives: To describe a specialist seating assessment clinic and a change in clinical practice arising from its work. Setting: National Spinal Injuries Centre, Stoke Mandeville Hospital, UK. Methods: Retrospective review of the ischial transcutaneous oxygen measurements of 50 newly injured and chronic spinal cord-injured (SCI) individuals seen in a specialist seating assessment clinic. Tissue oxygenation was measured in the sitting position (loaded) and during pressure relief (unloaded). Results: Mean duration of pressure relief required to raise tissue oxygen to unloaded levels was 1 min 51 s (range 42 sF3 min 30 s). Conclusion: These results confirmed the clinical perception that brief pressure lifts of 15-30 s are ineffective in raising transcutaneous oxygen tension (TcPO 2 ) to the unloaded level for most individuals. Sustaining the traditional pressure relief by lifting up from the seat for the necessary extended duration is neither practical nor desirable for the majority of clients. It was found that alternative methods of pressure relief were more easily sustainable and very efficient.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%