Validity of the current risk assessment scale for pressure ulcers in intensive care (EVARUCI) and the Norton-MI scale in critically ill patients

Lospitao-Gómez, S.; Viana, Tomás Sebastián; González-Ruiz, José María; Álvarez-Rodríguez, Joaquín

doi:10.1016/j.apnr.2017.09.004

Cited by 16 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of the studies allow us to subdivide the instruments into two big categories: the generalists, which are applicable in all care contexts, and the specifics, which are directed at adults in critical situation hospitalized in ICU. Thus, we identified six generalist instruments: Braden scale ( 36 , 26 - 27 , 29 - 32 , 34 , 37 , 40 , 43 - 47 ), Braden scale [ALB(Albumin)] ( 27 ), Emina ( 42 ), Norton MI [Modified by INSALUD ( Instituto Nacional de Salud Espanhol )] ( 35 ), RAPS (Risk Assessment Pressure Sore) ( 41 ) and Waterlow ( 40 , 46 ), and seven specific instruments: CALCULATE (Critical Care Pressure Ulcer Assessment Tool made Easy) ( 26 - 27 , 31 , 38 - 39 ), COMHON index (Nutrition and Hemodynamic Oxygenation of Conscious Mobility) ( 27 , 34 ), Cubbin & Jackson scale ( 44 - 45 , 47 ), EVARUCI ( Escala de Valoración Actual del riesgo de desarrollar Úlceras por presión en Cuidados Intensivos ) ( 33 , 35 , 42 - 43 ), RAPS-ICU (Intensive Care Units) ( 28 ), Song & Choi ( 47 ) and Suriaidi and Sanada ( 43 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Norton MI scale is a generic scale applicable in different contexts that contemplates five parameters: mental condition, mobility, activity, physical condition, and incontinence, scored from 1 to 4 to obtain a total score from 5 (maximum risk) to 20 (minimal risk). This scale considers the classification of risk as follows: 5 to 11 is considered very high risk, 12 to 14 is moderate risk, and > 14 is minimum or no risk ( 35 ). The Emina scale derives from Norton and contains five risk factors: mental condition, mobility, incontinence, nutrition, and activity, scored from 0 to 3 in each one of the subscales, in which the higher the score, the higher the risk of developing PU ( 42 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Risk assessment instruments for pressure ulcer in adults in critical situation: a scoping review

Picoito,

Lapuente,

Ramos

et al. 2023

Rev. Latino-Am. Enfermagem

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: to map the instruments for risk assessment of pressure ulcers in adults in critical situation in intensive care units; identify performance indicators of the instrument, and the appreciation of users regarding the instruments’ use/limitations. Method: a scoping review. We used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews in the writing of the study. We carried out the searches in the EBSCOhost search tool for 8 databases, resulting in 1846 studies, of which 22 studies compose the sample. Results: we identified two big instrument groups: generalist [Braden, Braden (ALB), Emina, Norton-MI, RAPS, and Waterlow]; and specific (CALCULATE, Cubbin & Jackson, EVARUCI, RAPS-ICU, Song & Choi, Suriaidi and Sanada, and COMHON index). Regarding the predictive value, EVARUCI and CALCULATE presented better results for performance indicators. Concerning appreciation/limitations indicated by users, we highlight the CALCULATE scale, followed by EVARUCI and RAPS-ICU, although they still need future adjustments. Conclusion: the mapping of the literature showed that the evidence is sufficient to indicate one or more instruments for the risk assessment of pressure ulcers for adults in critical situation in intensive care units.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk assessment instruments for pressure ulcer in adults in critical situation: a scoping review

Picoito,

Lapuente,

Ramos

et al. 2023

Rev. Latino-Am. Enfermagem

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…24,25 These scales incorporate multiple risk factors that have been shown to possess high levels of validity and reliability, enabling accurate predictions of pressure ulcer occurrence. [26][27][28][29][30] Additionally, considering internal patient factors, such as underlying disease and nutritional status, has been shown to enhance the predictive ability of these scales. 19,31 Beyond predicting pressure ulcer occurrence, the Norton scale is widely adapted for selecting and predicting treatment success in various conditions, such as implantable cardioverter defibrillators, 32 transcatheter aortic valve implantation in the elderly, 18 and reducing complications in hip arthroplasty in the elderly patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…24 25 These scales incorporate multiple risk factors that have been shown to possess high levels of validity and reliability, enabling accurate predictions of pressure ulcer occurrence. 26 27 28 29 30 Additionally, considering internal patient factors, such as underlying disease and nutritional status, has been shown to enhance the predictive ability of these scales. 19 31 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prediction Pressure Ulcers in High Care Unit Patients: Evaluating Risk Factors and Predictive Scale Using a Prospective Cross-Sectional Study

Indraswari,

Aisyiyah,

Kurniawan

et al. 2024

Avicenna J Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The incidence of ulcer pressure in the high care unit (HCU) was relatively high and could be reliably predicted using tools such as the Norton and Jackson/Cubbin scales. However, other risk factors, such as age, gender, consciousness, systemic condition, duration of treatment, and use of restraint, may contribute to the occurrence of ulcer pressure. This study was conducted to analyze the relationship of various risk factors for pressure ulcers and prediction of ulcer pressure, using Norton and Jackson/Cubbin scale, to incident pressure ulcers in HCU patient. Methods This study utilized a prospective cross-sectional study design to analyze various risk factors for ulcer pressure development in a patient admitted to the HCU, including age, gender, blood profile, consciousness, duration of treatment, and use of restraint. The Norton and Jackson/Cubbin scale was employed to predict pressure ulcers. The relationship between the risk factors and the prediction of pressure ulcer incidents was evaluated using multiple logistic binary regression analysis. Result Both the Norton and Jackson/Cubbin scales predicted a lower risk of pressure ulcer development (60.98 and 99.02%, respectively). This prediction is consistent with the low incidence of pressure injuries found, which is only 4.39%. Furthermore, the relationship between the identified risk factor (gender, duration of treatment in HCU and use of restraint) and the prediction and incident of pressure ulcer was not significant (p > 0.05). Thus, it is suggested that these risk factors may not strong predictors of pressure ulcer development. Conclusion This study's result indicated no significant relationship exists between possible identified risk factors and the development of pressure ulcers in HCU patients. However, the Norton and Jackson/Cubbin scales were reliable predictors of pressure ulcer occurrence, with both scales predicting a lower risk of pressure ulcer development.

show abstract

“…It continues to be used for research purposes and can be used in various areas, e.g. assessing the relation between the zinc level and pressure ulcer development [26], for a rapid assessment in emergency care [27], in operating rooms [28], in intensive care [29] in burns centres [30], etc.…”

Section: Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment With the Norton Scalementioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of pressure ulcers in physically handicapped patients

Neugebauer

Tóthová

2020

DHS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeAssessment of pressure ulcers is an indicator of nursing care quality. In physically handicapped patients, the risk is elevated, due to the neuropathy and incontinence that frequently accompany paresis and paralysis. We conducted a systematic review of 4 assessment scales to assess their use and usefulness for these patients.Materials/methodsWe searched 5 databases for articles published between 2016 and 2018 that included terms related to the risk of pressure ulcers in physically handicapped patients, including the names of 4 assessment scales (Norton, Braden, Waterlow and Spinal Cord Injury Pressure Ulcer Scale). One hundred and three sources were returned, from which we selected 10. We also selected an earlier source, for a total of 11.ResultsThe Braden and Waterlow scales are popular in clinical practice. The Norton scale is used for scientific comparisons and in clinical practice only sporadically. Expert opinion suggests that acceptance of the Spinal Cord Injury Pressure Ulcer Scale could reduce the incidence of pressure ulcers in physically handicapped patients.ConclusionsIntroduction of a scale designed for handicapped patients, combined with better preventive measures, could result in the bedsore reduction of pressure ulcers. Research testing the effectiveness of the Spinal Cord Injury Pressure Ulcer Scale in the Czech population is needed to validate its use in clinical practice.

show abstract

Validity of the current risk assessment scale for pressure ulcers in intensive care (EVARUCI) and the Norton-MI scale in critically ill patients

Cited by 16 publications

References 11 publications

Risk assessment instruments for pressure ulcer in adults in critical situation: a scoping review

Risk assessment instruments for pressure ulcer in adults in critical situation: a scoping review

Prediction Pressure Ulcers in High Care Unit Patients: Evaluating Risk Factors and Predictive Scale Using a Prospective Cross-Sectional Study

Assessment of pressure ulcers in physically handicapped patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About