Twenty-four hour pressure area management: study report

Clifford, Ian; Candler, Steve; Starling, Mark R.

doi:10.12968/bjon.1995.4.22.1308

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other scales have been successfully used on a limited basis with the SCI population in various health-care settings. Arnold (1994) modified the Gosnell scale (Gosnell, 1989), which identified activity, mobility, incontinence, nutrition, and mental status as risk factors, while the Waterlow Pressure Sore Risk Calculator (Clifford et al, 1995;Edwards, 1995) considers build/weight for height, continence, mobility, and appetite.…”

Section: Risk-assessment Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Narrative Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Rehabilitation of People With Spinal Cord Injury

Gerber¹,

Deshpande²,

Prabhakar³

et al. 2020

Am J Phys Med Rehabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bed Positioning21. Use bed positioning devices and techniques that are compatible with the bed type and the individual's health status.Avoid positioning individuals directly on pressure ulcers regardless of the pressure ulcer anatomical location (trochanter, ischium, sacrum, and heel) unless such position is necessanry for performance of ADLs, such as eating or hygiene.Use pillows, cushions, and positioning aids to reduce pressure on existing pressure ulcers or vulnerable skin areas by elevating them away from the support surface.Avoid closed cutouts or donut-type cushions.Prevent contact between bony prominences.Elevate the head of the bed no higher than 30 degrees unless medically necessary.Reposition individuals in bed at least every 2 hours. Sources: Sackett, D.L. Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations on the use of antithrombotic agents. Chest 95 (2 Suppl) (1989): 25-45; and the U.S. Preventive Health Services Task Force. Guide to clinical preventive services: An assessment of the effectiveness of 169 interventions. Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins, 1996.

show abstract

Section: Risk-assessment Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%