Effect of Varying Repositioning Frequency on Pressure Injury Prevention in Nursing Home Residents: TEAM-UP Trial Results

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical effectiveness of three nursing-home-wide repositioning intervals (2-, 3-, or 4-hour) without compromising pressure injury (PrI) incidence in 4 weeks. METHODS: An embedded pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted in nine nursing homes (NHs) that were randomly assigned to one of three repositioning intervals. Baseline (12 months) and 4-week intervention data were provided during the TEAM-UP (Turn Everyone And Move for Ulcer Prevention) study. Intervention residents were without current PrIs, had PrI risk (Braden Scale score) ≥10 (not severe risk), and used viable 7-inch high-density foam mattresses. Each arm includes three NHs with an assigned single repositioning interval (2-, 3-, or 4-hour) as standard care during the intervention. A wireless patient monitoring system, using wearable single-use patient sensors, cued nursing staff by displaying resident repositioning needs on conveniently placed monitors. The primary outcome was PrI incidence; the secondary outcome was staff repositioning compliance fidelity. RESULTS: From May 2017 to October 2019, 1,100 residents from nine NHs were fitted with sensors; 108 of these were ineligible for some analyses because of missing baseline data. The effective sample size included 992 residents (mean age, 78 ± 13 years; 63% women). The PrI incidence during the intervention was 0.0% compared with 5.24% at baseline, even though intervention resident clinical risk scores were significantly higher (P < .001). Repositioning compliance for the 4-hour repositioning interval (95%) was significantly better than for the 2-hour (80%) or 3-hour (90%) intervals (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that current 2-hour protocols can be relaxed for many NH residents without compromising PrI prevention. A causal link was not established between repositioning interval treatments and PrI outcome; however, no new PrIs developed. Compliance improved as repositioning interval lengthened

WHS Guidelines for the Treatment of Pressure Ulcers: 2023 Update

The major populations at risk for developing pressure ulcers are older adults who have multiple risk factors that increase their vulnerability, people who are critically ill and those with spinal cord injury/disease. The reported prevalence of pressure ulcers in the United States is 2.5 million. However, this estimate is derived from acute care facilities and does not include people who are living at home or in nursing facilities. Despite the implementation of hospital and facility-based preventive measures, the incidence of pressure ulcers has not decreased in decades. In addition to the burden of pain, infection and death, it is estimated that hospital-acquired pressure ulcers cost the health system $26.8 billion annually with over 50% of the cost attributed to treating Stage 3 and 4 pressure injuries. Thus, it is critical to examine the literature and develop guidelines that will improve the outcomes of this complex and costly condition. This guideline update is a compendium of the best available evidence for the treatment of Pressure Ulcers published since the last update in 2015 and includes a new section based on changing demographics entitled ‘Palliative wound care for seriously ill patients with pressure ulcers’. The overall goal of the Wound Healing Society Guideline project is to present clear, concise and commercial free guidelines that clinicians can use to guide care, that researchers can use to develop studies that will improve treatment and that both clinicians and researchers can use to understand the gaps in our knowledge base

TEAM-UP for quality: a cluster randomized controlled trial protocol focused on preventing pressure ulcers through repositioning frequency and precipitating factors

Background: Pressure ulcers/injuries (PrUs), a critical concern for nursing homes (NH), are responsible for chronic wounds, amputations, septic infections, and premature deaths. PrUs occur most commonly in older adults and NH residence is a risk factor for their development, with at least one of every nine U.S. NH residents experiencing a PrU and many NHs having high incidence and prevalence rates, in some instances well over 20%. PrU direct treatment costs are greater than prevention costs, making prevention-focused protocols critical. Current PrU prevention protocols recommend repositioning residents at moderate, high, and severe risk every 2 h. The advent of visco- elastic (VE) high-density foam support-surfaces over the past decade may now make it possible to extend the repositioning interval to every 3 or 4 h without increasing PrU development. The TEAM-UP (Turn Everyone And Move for Ulcer Prevention) study aims to determine: 1) whether repositioning interval can be extended for NH residents without compromising PrU incidence and 2) how changes in medical severity interact with changes in risk level and repositioning schedule to predict PrU development. Methods: In this proposed cluster randomized study, 9 NHs will be randomly assigned to one of three repositioning intervals (2, 3, or 4 h) for a 4-week period. Each enrolled site will use a single NH-wide repositioning interval as the standard of care for residents at low, moderate, and high risk of PrU development (N = 951) meeting the following criteria: minimum 3-day stay, without PrUs, no adhesive allergy, and using VE support surfaces (mattresses). An FDA-cleared patient monitoring system that records position/movement of these residents via individual wireless sensors will be used to visually cue staff when residents need repositioning and document compliance with repositioning protocols. Discussion: This study will advance knowledge about repositioning frequency and clinically assessed PrU risk level in relation to PrU incidence and medical severity. Outcomes of this research will contribute to future guidelines for more precise preventive nursing practices and refinement of PrU prevention guidelines. Trial registration: Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02996331

Models of classroom assessment for course-based research experiences

Course-based research pedagogy involves positioning students as contributors to authentic research projects as part of an engaging educational experience that promotes their learning and persistence in science. To develop a model for assessing and grading students engaged in this type of learning experience, the assessment aims and practices of a community of experienced course-based research instructors were collected and analyzed. This approach defines four aims of course-based research assessment—(1) Assessing Laboratory Work and Scientific Thinking; (2) Evaluating Mastery of Concepts, Quantitative Thinking and Skills; (3) Appraising Forms of Scientific Communication; and (4) Metacognition of Learning—along with a set of practices for each aim. These aims and practices of assessment were then integrated with previously developed models of course-based research instruction to reveal an assessment program in which instructors provide extensive feedback to support productive student engagement in research while grading those aspects of research that are necessary for the student to succeed. Assessment conducted in this way delicately balances the need to facilitate students’ ongoing research with the requirement of a final grade without undercutting the important aims of a CRE education

Nursing culture assessment tool (NCAT): Empirical validation for use in long-term care

Background: Capturing general aspects of the occupational subculture of nursing is needed in long-term care (LTC) given its latent influence on the quality of care that residents receive and on the ability of nursing staff (licensed nurses and certified nursing assistants) to implement evidence-based practice innovations. The psychometrically validated Nursing Culture Assessment Tool (NCAT) provides a comprehensive assessment using six dimensions (teamwork, communication, satisfaction, professional commitment, behaviors, and expectations), and evaluation of these dimensions could help positively reshape the culture before any change implementation. Purpose: Aims were to: (1) assess the validity and reliability of the NCAT across nursing staff in a single type of clinical setting – LTC facilities, and (2) present a refined theoretical model of the interaction of culture and practice implementation. Methods: A cross-sectional, exploratory investigation of the NCAT in LTC settings was conducted. Empirical construct validity of the 19-item NCAT's six subscales was investigated by confirmatory factor analysis using a sample of licensed nurses and certified nursing assistants (n = 318). Results: The model fit was judged using the comparative fit index (0.94) and standardized root mean-square residual (0.05). Cronbach's alpha correlation coefficients of items in each subscale and in the overall scale ranged from 0.76 to 0.94. Conclusion: A summary of the NCAT development and report on its psychometric properties when administered in LTC settings is provided, extending previous findings of the NCAT's enhanced stability when used in assessing nursing staff perceptions in LTC and by demonstrating that the NCAT is a reliable and valid psychometric screening tool for nursing culture