Skip to main content

Table 1 Patient characteristics, outcomes and changes in process

From: Cost-effectiveness of a pressure ulcer quality collaborative

 

Non-selected patients

Selected patients

Number of patients

254

88

BMI (average)

26

26 (5)

Age (average)

80

82

Females (average)

169 (67%) F

60 (68%) F

Patients at risk of pressure ulcers (average)

254 (100%)

88 (100%)

Comparison of clinical effects

Baseline

Baseline

After

Prevalence

   

   Grade 1

50 (20%)

21 (23.9%)

16 (18.2%)

   Grade 2

9 (3.5%)

10 (11.4%)

2 (2.3%)

   Grade 3

3 (1.2%)

1 (1.1%)

1 (1.1%)

   Grade 4

5 (2%)

2 (2.3%)

1 (1.1%)

   Total

59 (27%)

34 (38.6%)

20 (22.7%)*

Incidence (1 month)

   

   Grade 1

19 (7%)

10 (14.7%)

4 (4.5%)

   Grade 2

6 (3%)

3 (3.4%)

0 (0%)

   Total

25 (9%)

13 (15%)

4 (4.5%)*

Useful interventions

   Risk assessment

254 (100%)

88 (100%)

88 (100%)

   Using a 30-degree side to side turn at least every 4 hours

24 (9%)

7 (8%)

9 (10%)

   Preventive mattress

78 (30%)

24 (27%)

40 (45%)**

   Involving patients in prevention

41 (16%)

3 (3%)

7 (8%)

   Involving family/friends/caregivers in prevention

26 (10%)

3 (3%)

9 (11%)

   Reactivation and mobilization by paramedics

10 (4%)

3 (3%)

11 (13%)

   Smearing of the skin in case of incontinence

30 (11%)

8 (9%)

9 (11%)

   Assessing nutritional state and preventing nutritional deficiency

13 (5%)

12 (14%)

4 (5%)

   Inserting a catheter to prevent maceration of the skin

3 (1%)

1 (1%)

1 (1%)

   Ensuring a clean, dry and square lower layer of bedclothes

52 (20%)

8 (9%)

12 (14%)

Non-useful interventions

   Smearing the skin (with topical agents) to prevent disturbance in blood supply caused by pressure

50 (20%)

23 (26%)

6 (7%)*

   Massage

3 (4%)

0 (0%)

2 (2%)

   Using a 90-degree side to side turn at least every 4 hours

2 (1%)

0 (0%)

3 (4%)

  1. *P < 0.05
  2. **p < 0.005