11 research outputs found

    Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

    Get PDF
    Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

    How can communities and organisations improve their health literacy?

    No full text
    Definitions of health literacy have tended to focus on the abilities of patients and communities, rather than on the ability of the health system and its services to respond to patients’ different levels of health literacy. However, health literacy is increasingly being recognised as part of a dynamic, two-way relationship, affected by both organisational factors (e.g. tailoring of communication and care to patients’ needs) and community factors (e.g. individuals’ ability to perceive and seek care). Developing a more comprehensive understanding of health literacy is an important step towards improving health literacy. Most health literacy interventions described in the literature tend to be small and focused on either organisational or community aspects of health literacy rather than addressing both sides. However, some good examples can be found in Local Health Districts and Primary Health Networks in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, of health literacy interventions that are multidimensional and address both organisational and community health literacy. Although progress is being made, gaps in knowledge remain. A deeper understanding of the intersection between health literacy, culture and language is needed, as well as identification of effective communication strategies after patient comprehension has been assessed using strategies such as ‘teach-back’. The teach-back method can be used to check patient understanding, but it is not a communication strategy in itself. If teach-back shows that the patient has not understood, clinicians can employ communication strategies such as limiting discussion to two or three points, or using visual aids. If these are not effective, extended family networks and the use of patient navigators may be required. These health literacy interventions address both organisational and community aspects. More work is needed to evaluate such interventions, in particular their impact on health literacy and appropriate and timely access to healthcare
    corecore