Buy this Article for $7.95

Have a coupon or promotional code? Enter it here:

When you buy this you'll get access to the ePub version, a downloadable PDF, and the ability to print the full article.

Keywords

pressure ulcer, deep tissue injury, nursing home, Minimum Data Set, Defloor model

 

Authors

  1. Ahn, Hyochol PhD, ARNP, ANP-BC
  2. Cowan, Linda PhD, ARNP, FNP-BC, CWS
  3. Garvan, Cynthia PhD
  4. Lyon, Debra PhD, RN, FAAN
  5. Stechmiller, Joyce PhD, ACNP-BC, FAAN

Abstract

PURPOSE: To provide information on risk factors associated with pressure ulcers (PrUs), including suspected deep tissue injury (sDTI), in nursing home residents in the United States.

 

TARGET AUDIENCE: This continuing education activity is intended for physicians and nurses with an interest in skin and wound care.

 

OBJECTIVES: After participating in this educational activity, the participant should be better able to:

 

1. Examine the literature related to risk factors for the development of PrUs.

 

2. Compare risk factors associated with the prevalence of PrUs and sDTI from the revised Minimum Data Set 3.0 2012 using a modified Defloor's conceptual model of PrUs as a theoretical framework.

 

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:This study aims to characterize and compare risk factors associated with pressure ulcers (PrUs), including suspected deep tissue injury (sDTI), in nursing home (NH) residents in the United States.

 

DESIGN: Secondary analysis of the 2012 Minimum Data Set (MDS 3.0).

 

SETTING: Medicare- or Medicaid-certified NHs in the United States.

 

PARTICIPANTS: Nursing home residents (n = 2,936,146) 18 years or older with complete PrU data, who received comprehensive assessments from January to December 2012.

 

MEASUREMENTS: Pressure ulcer by stage was the outcome variable. Explanatory variables (age, gender, race and ethnicity, body mass index, skin integrity, system failure, disease, infection, mobility, and cognition) from the MDS 3.0 were aligned with the 4 elements of Defloor's conceptual model: compressive forces, shearing forces, tissue tolerance for pressure, and tissue tolerance for oxygen.

 

RESULTS: Of 2,936,146 NH residents who had complete data for PrU, 89.9% had no PrU; 8.4% had a Stage 2, 3, or 4 or unstagable PrU; and 1.7% had an sDTI. The MDS variables corresponding to the 4 elements of Defloor's model were significantly predictive of both PrU and sDTI. Black residents had the highest risk of any-stage PrU, and Hispanic residents had the highest risk of sDTI. Skin integrity, system failure, infection, and disease risk factors had larger effect sizes for sDTI than for other PrU stages.

 

CONCLUSIONS: The MDS data support Defloor's model and inform clinicians, educators, researchers, and policymakers on risk factors associated with PrUs and sDTI in NH residents in the United States participating in Medicare and Medicaid.