The nursing care for the medical device related pressure injury patient with a mucosal pressure injury due to an endotracheal tube: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Pressure injury (PI) due to medical devices is one of the most common PIs, especially in patients treated in intensive care. Medical device-related pressure injuries (MDRPIs), as part of their treatment, require extra care and prevention interventions than injuries caused by immobilization. Standardized nursing models are needed to care for PIs caused by medical devices on mucous membranes. PURPOSE: To provide information about the evaluation and care of the MDRPIs in the mucosal membrane due to the endotracheal tube (ET). CASE REPORT: A 35-year-old male with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and coronavirus disease has MDRPIs on the lower lip edge due to the ET on the fifteenth day after intubation. North American Nursing Diagnosis Association (NANDA) diagnoses were determined by systematically analyzing the data using the Gordon's Functional Health Patterns (GFHP) model in the patient. Nursing care was planned and applied in line with the determined NANDA diagnoses, Nursing Outcomes Classification (NOC) interventions, and using the recommendations of current PI guides for treatment of MDRPIs. CONCLUSION: This case report illustrates MDRPIs resulting from ET and provides information about the formation of MDRPIs and appropriate maintenance therapy. Future research is recommended to examine and evaluate the nursing care and outcome of MDRPIs in different mucosal membranes.

Hospital-Acquired Pressure Injuries in Adults With Prone Positioning Using Manual Method Versus Specialty Bed: A Retrospective Comparison Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the incidence of hospital-acquired pressure injuries (HAPIs) in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and placed in a prone position manually or using a specialty bed designed to facilitate prone positioning. A secondary aim was to compare mortality rates between these groups. DESIGN: Retrospective review of electronic medical records. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: The sample comprised 160 patients with ARDS managed by prone positioning. Their mean age was 61.08 years (SD = 12.73); 58% (n = 96) were male. The study setting was a 355-bed community hospital in the Western United States (Stockton, California). Data were collected from July 2019 to January 2021. METHODS: Data from electronic medical records were retrospectively searched for the development of pressure injuries, mortality, hospital length of stay, oxygenation status when placed in a prone position, and the presence of a COVID-19 infection. RESULTS: A majority of patients with ARDS were manually placed in a prone position (n = 106; 64.2%), and 54 of these patients (50.1%) were placed using a specialty care bed. Slightly more than half (n = 81; 50.1%) developed HAPIs. Chi-square analyses showed no association with the incidence of HAPIs using manual prone positioning versus the specialty bed (P = .9567). Analysis found no difference in HAPI occurrences between those with COVID-19 and patients without a coronavirus infection (P = .8462). Deep-tissue pressure injuries were the most common type of pressure injury. More patients (n = 85; 80.19%) who were manually placed in a prone position died compared to 58.18% of patients (n = 32) positioned using the specialty bed (P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: No differences in HAPI rates were found when placing patients manually in a prone position versus positioning using a specialty bed designed for this purpose.

Incidence of hospital acquired pressure injury in critically ill patients with COVID-19 in prone position admitted to the intensive care unit.

Critical patients have conditions that may favor the occurrence of hospital-acquired pressure injury (HAPI). The objective of this study was to identify the incidence and factors associated with the occurrence of HAPI in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) who used the prone position. Retrospective cohort study carried out in an ICU of a tertiary university hospital. Two hundred four patients with positive real-time polymerase chain reactions were evaluated, of which 84 were placed in the prone position. All patients were sedated and submitted to invasive mechanical ventilation. Of the prone patients, 52 (62%) developed some type of HAPI during hospitalization. The main place of occurrence of HAPI was the sacral region, followed by the gluteus and thorax. Of the patients who developed HAPI, 26 (50%) had this event in places possibly associated with the prone position. The factors associated with the occurrence of HAPI in patients prone to coronavirus disease 2019 were the Braden Scale and the length of stay in the ICU. The incidence of HAPI in prone patients was extremely high (62%), which denotes the need to implement protocols in order to prevent the occurrence of these events.

The risk of pressure ulcers in a proned COVID population.

The utilisation of prone positioning has been vital during the COVID-19 pandemic, however risks the development of anterior pressure ulcers. An observational study was performed to examine the prevalence of pressure ulcers in this population and define risk factors. Eighty-seven patients admitted to critical care were studied. Of 62 patients with >1 day in prone position, 55 (88.7%) developed anterior pressure ulcers, 91% of which were anterior. The most commonly affected site were the oral commisures (34.6%), related to endotracheal tube placement. Prone positioning (p < .001) and the number of days prone (OR 3.11, 95% CI 1.46-6.62, p = 0.003) were a significant risk factors in development of an anterior ulcer. Prone positioning is therefore a significant cause of anterior pressure ulcers in this population.

Evaluation of evidence of prevention and management of facial pressure injuries in medical staff.

AIM: This systematic review evaluated the quality of evidence for the prevention and management of facial pressure injuries in medical staff. DESIGN: This review was presented in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. METHODS: We retrieved the relevant studies from 19 databases. Using the literature evaluation standards and evidence grading system of the Australian Joanna Briggs Institute Evidence-Based Health Care Center, we evaluated the quality of the literature encompassing different types of research and assessed their levels of evidence. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies were included, including seven expert consensuses, two recommended practices, one clinical decision, one best practice information booklet, one systematic review and one randomized controlled trial. In the end, 31 best evidence were summarized, including skin cleaning and care, PPE placement and movement, reasonable use of dressings, treatment measures and education and training.

Abnormal thrombosis and neutrophil activation increase hospital-acquired sacral pressure injuries and morbidity in COVID-19 patients.

Hospitalized patients have an increased risk of developing hospital-acquired sacral pressure injury (HASPI). However, it is unknown whether SARS-CoV-2 infection affects HASPI development. To explore the role of SARS-CoV-2 infection in HASPI development, we conducted a single institution, multi-hospital, retrospective study of all patients hospitalized for ≥5 days from March 1, 2020 to December 31, 2020. Patient demographics, hospitalization information, ulcer characteristics, and 30-day-related morbidity were collected for all patients with HASPIs, and intact skin was collected from HASPI borders in a patient subset. We determined the incidence, disease course, and short-term morbidity of HASPIs in COVID-19(+) patients, and characterized the skin histopathology and tissue gene signatures associated with HASPIs in COVID-19 disease. COVID-19(+) patients had a 63% increased HASPI incidence rate, HASPIs of more severe ulcer stage (OR 2.0, p<0.001), and HASPIs more likely to require debridement (OR 3.1, p=0.04) compared to COVID-19(-) patients. Furthermore, COVID-19(+) patients with HASPIs had 2.2x increased odds of a more severe hospitalization course compared to COVID-19(+) patients without HASPIs. HASPI skin histology from COVID-19(+) patients predominantly showed thrombotic vasculopathy, with the number of thrombosed vessels being significantly greater than HASPIs from COVID-19(-) patients. Transcriptional signatures of a COVID-19(+) sample subset were enriched for innate immune responses, thrombosis, and neutrophil activation genes. Overall, our results suggest that immunologic dysregulation secondary to SARS-CoV-2 infection, including neutrophil dysfunction and abnormal thrombosis, may play a pathogenic role in development of HASPIs in patients with severe COVID-19.

Examining Violaceous Skin Discoloration during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Conducting Research in Resource Scarcity.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the observed patterns and presentations of violaceous discoloration that appeared to be related to the COVID-19 disease process. METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study included adults who were COVID-19 positive with purpuric/violaceous lesions in pressure-adjacent areas of the gluteus without preexisting pressure injury. Patients were admitted to an ICU at a single quaternary academic medical center between April 1 and May 15, 2020. Data were compiled by review of the electronic health record. The wounds were described by location, tissue type (violaceous, granulation, slough, eschar), wound margin (irregular, diffuse, nonlocalized), and periwound condition (intact). RESULTS: A total of 26 patients were included in the study. Purpuric/violaceous wounds were found predominantly on White (92.3%) men (88.0%) aged 60 to 89 years (76.9%) with a body mass index 30 kg/m2 or higher (46.1%). The majority of wounds were located on the sacrococcygeal (42.3%) and fleshy gluteal regions (46.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Wounds were heterogeneous in appearance (poorly defined violaceous skin discoloration of acute onset), and the patient population had clinical characteristics similar to acute skin failure (eg, concomitant organ failures and hemodynamic instability). Additional larger population-based studies with biopsies may assist in finding patterns related to these dermatologic changes.

Characteristics of COVID-19 patients who developed pressure injuries: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the characteristics of patients with COVID-19 who developed pressure injuries (PIs), the characteristics of PIs experienced, and the incidence and prevalence of PIs among the patients with COVID-19. PIs are associated with increased morbidity, mortality and healthcare expense. PIs have been reported among patients who have contracted COVID-19. Understanding the characteristics of COVID-19 patients, and how PIs are prevented and managed, may inform care and optimise the outcomes for COVID-19-positive patients. METHOD: A scoping review was conducted. All study designs, including grey literature, published in the English language from December 2019 to March 2021, reporting on patients with COVID-19 and PIs, were included. RESULTS: In total, 27 publications (n=4820 patients) were included in the review. The reported incidence rate of PIs was 7.3-77.0%. The causative factors noted were: prone positioning (28.5%); medical devices (21.4%); and medical devices used during prone positioning (14.2%). The most common PI sites were the cheeks (18.7%). PIs occurred on average at 14.7 days post-acute care admission. Of the PIs where staging information was specified (67.7%), the most common was Stage 2/II (45.2%). PI risk may intensify on account of the intrinsic mechanism of COVID-19-associated intensive care treatment. CONCLUSION: PI prevention and management should be prioritised for patients with COVID-19, given the reported high prevalence of PIs and exacerbated risk arising from the use of prone position and medical devices. Further research is required to understand the association between COVID-19 and PIs, and to guide effective prevention and treatment approaches.

Pressure Injury Prevention in Patients in Prone Position With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: In patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome, prone positioning improves oxygenation and reduces mortality. Pressure injuries occur frequently because of prolonged prone positioning in high-risk patients, and preventive measures are limited. This article describes 2 patients who developed minimal pressure injuries despite several prone positionings. Prevention strategies are also described. CLINICAL FINDINGS: A 64-year-old man and a 76-year-old woman were admitted to the hospital with respiratory insufficiency. Due to acute respiratory distress syndrome, both patients were intubated and received mechanical ventilation and prone positioning. DIAGNOSIS: Both patients had positive test results for SARS-CoV-2 and a diagnosis of acute respiratory distress syndrome. INTERVENTIONS: Patient 1 was in prone position for 137 hours during 9 rounds of prone positioning; patient 2, for 99 hours during 6 rounds of prone positioning. The standardized pressure injury prevention bundle for prone positioning consisted of skin care, nipple protection with a multilayer foam dressing, a 2-part prone positioning set, and micropositioning maneuvers. For both patients, 2-cm-thick mixed-porosity polyurethane foam was added between skin and positioning set in the thoracic and pelvic areas and a polyurethane foam cushion was added under the head. OUTCOMES: Patient 1 developed no pressure injuries. Patient 2 developed category 2 pressure injuries on the chin and above the right eye during deviations from the protocol. CONCLUSION: For both patients, the additional application of polyurethane foam was effective for preventing pressure injuries. These case reports support the addition of polyurethane foam to prevent pressure injuries in patients placed in the prone position.

Characteristics of Patients with Pressure Injuries in a COVID-19 Referral Hospital.

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective study aimed to describe the characteristics of patients treated at a COVID-19 referral hospital from March 2020 to June 2021 who experienced pressure injuries (PIs) either before or after admission. METHODS: The researchers collected and analyzed data on patients' demographic characteristics, symptoms, comorbidities, location and severity of PI, laboratory values, oxygen therapy, length of stay, and vasopressor use. RESULTS: During the study period, 1,070 patients were hospitalized for COVID-19 with varying degrees of severity, and 12 patients were diagnosed with PI. Eight (66.7%) of the patients with PI were men. The median age was 60 (range, 51-71) years, and half of the patients had obesity. Eleven of the patients with PI (91.4%) had at least one comorbid condition. The sacrum and gluteus were the two most commonly affected sites. Those with stage 3 PI had a substantially greater median d-dimer value (7,900 ng/mL) than patients with stage 2 PI (1,100 ng/mL). The average length of stay was 22 (range, 9.8-40.3) days. CONCLUSIONS: Health professionals should be aware of an increase in d-dimer in patients with COVID-19 and PI. Even though PIs in these patients might not result in mortality, an increase in morbidity can be avoided with the right care.

Incidence of facial pressure injuries in health-care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIM: To evaluate the incidence of facial pressure injuries in health-care professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic in a meta-analysis. METHODS: Related studies were obtained through electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) Chinese Scientific Journal (VIP) China Biomedical Literature service systems (CBM) and Wanfang Data (from inception to 27 November 2021). The pooled incidence and the 95% confidence interval of facial pressure injuries were calculated with Review Manager v5.4 software. RESULTS: Overall, 16 studies with 14 430 health-care professionals were included. Pooled results showed that the pooled incidence of facial pressure injury in health-care professionals was 58.8% (95% CI: 49.0%-68.7%; p < 0.01). The results of the subgroup analysis showed that the incidence of facial pressure injury in these staff was high, and predominantly stage I pressure injury, in the following cases: in health-care professionals who wore personal protective equipment for longer than 4 h, in those without any training experience, and on the nose. CONCLUSION: Administrators and researchers should pay attention to preventing facial pressure injury related to the wearing of personal protective equipment (PPE) by ensuring all health-care professionals receive training and by limiting prolonged periods of use.

Results of the 2022 Wound Survey on Skin Failure/End-of-Life Terminology and Pressure Injuries.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the major findings of a survey first conducted in 2019 and repeated in 2022 and review new concepts (angiosomes and pressure injuries) and challenges due to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This survey captures participants' ranking of agreement or disagreement with 10 statements on Kennedy terminal ulcers, Skin Changes At Life's End, Trombley-Brennan terminal tissue injuries, skin failure, and unavoidable/avoidable pressure injuries. The survey was hosted online by SurveyMonkey from February 2022 until June 2022. All interested persons were able to participate in this voluntary, anonymous survey. RESULTS: Overall, 145 respondents participated. The same nine statements achieved at least 80% agreement (somewhat agree or strongly agree) as in the previous survey. The one statement that did not reach consensus also failed to reach consensus in the 2019 survey: "The concept of skin failure does not include pressure injuries." CONCLUSIONS: It is the authors' hope that this will stimulate more research into terminology and etiology of skin changes in persons at end of life and encourage more research regarding terminology and criteria to define which skin lesions are unavoidable or avoidable.

Prone positioning in COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome and invasive mechanical ventilation.

OBJECTIVE: To identify adverse events related to prone positioning in COVID-19 patients with severe disease and acute respiratory distress syndrome, to analyze the risk factors associated with the development of anterior pressure ulcers, to determine whether the recommendation of prone positioning is associated with improved clinical outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective study performed in 63 consecutive patients with COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to intensive care unit on invasive mechanical ventilation and treated with prone positioning between March and April 2020. Association between prone-related pressure ulcers and selected variables was explored by the means of logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 139 proning cycles were performed. The mean number of cycles were 2 [1-3] and the mean duration per cycle was of 22h [15-24]. The prevalence of adverse events this population was 84.9 %, being the physiologic ones (i.e., hypo/hypertension) the most prevalent. 29 out of 63 patients (46%) developed prone-related pressure ulcers. The risk factors for prone-related pressure ulcers were older age, hypertension, levels of pre-albumin <21mg/dl, the number of proning cycles and severe disease. We observed a significant increase in the PaO2/FiO2 at different time points during the prone positioning, and a significant decrease after it. CONCLUSIONS: There is a high incidence of adverse events due to PD, with the physiological type being the most frequent. The identification of the main risk factors for the development of prone-related pressure ulcers will help to prevent the occurrence of these lesions during the prone positioning. Prone positioning offered an improvement in the oxygenation in these patients.

Wound healing in stage IV pressure injury with use of adjunct autologous activated platelet-rich plasma therapy: a case report.

INTRODUCTION: Pressure injuries remain a major burden worldwide with associated morbidity and financial implications. Patients in the ICU, such as those with severe COVID-19, are especially susceptible to PI as they remain immobile for extended durations while intubated. OBJECTIVE: This report examines a case of stage 4 PI in a senior COVID-19 survivor treated with adjunct intravenous and intralesional aaPRP therapy in addition to topical hyaluronic acid/silver sulfadiazine cream and framycetin sulphate dressing. CASE REPORT: aaPRP therapy was administered via intralesional injection and intravenous infusion 4 times with 2 weeks between therapies, while the aforementioned topical cream and dressing were applied every 2 days between visits. The patient also had controlled diabetes which may affect the wound healing process. CONCLUSIONS: This report concludes with a discussion of how COVID-19 carries important dynamics in the pathogenesis of PI and how adjunct administration of intravenous and intralesional aaPRP, which is abundant in regenerative proteins, may be beneficial in the management of PI.

Influencing factors of medical device-related pressure ulcers in medical personnel during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the influencing factors of medical device related pressure injury (MDRPU) in medical staff by meta-analysis. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted by PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, VIP, CBM, and WanFang Data (from inception to July 27, 2022). Two researchers independently performed literature screening, quality evaluation and data extraction, and meta-analysis was conducted with RevMan 5.4 and Stata12.0 software. RESULTS: Total of 11215 medical staff were included in 9 articles. Meta analysis showed that gender, occupation, sweating, wearing time, single working time, department of COVID-19, preventive measures, and level 3 PPE were the risk factors for MDRPU in medical staff (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The outbreak of COVID-19 led to the occurrence of MDRPU among medical staff, and the influencing factors should be focused on. The medical administrator can further improve and standardize the preventive measures of MDRPU according to the influencing factors. Medical staff should accurately identify high-risk factors in the clinical work process, implement intervention measures, and reduce the incidence of MDRPU.

EffEctiveness of Prophylactic fOam dressings in the prevention of saCral pressure injuries in at-risk hospitalised patients: the EEPOC trial.

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic dressings are increasingly used to prevent pressure injuries in hospitalised patients. However, evidence regarding the effectiveness of these dressings is still emerging. This trial aims to determine the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a prophylactic silicone foam border dressing in preventing sacral pressure injuries in medical-surgical patients. METHODS: This is a multicentre, pragmatic, parallel group, randomised controlled trial. A sample size of 1320 was calculated to have >90% power to detect a 5% difference in the primary outcome at an alpha of 0.05. Adult patients admitted to participating medical-surgical wards are screened for eligibility: ≥18 years, admitted to hospital within the previous 36 h, expected length of stay of ≥24 h, and assessed high risk for hospital-acquired pressure injury. Consenting participants are randomly allocated to either prophylactic silicone foam dressing intervention or usual care without any dressing as the control group via a web-based randomisation service independent of the trial. Patients are enrolled across three Australian hospitals. The primary outcome is the cumulative incidence of patients who develop a sacral pressure injury. Secondary outcomes include the time to sacral pressure injury, incidence of severity (stage) of sacral pressure injury, cost-effectiveness of dressings, and process evaluation. Participant outcomes are assessed daily for up to 14 days by blinded independent outcome assessors using de-identified, digitally modified sacral photographs. Those who develop a sacral pressure injury are followed for an additional 14 days to estimate costs of pressure injury treatment. Analysis of clinical outcomes will be based on intention-to-treat, per-protocol, and sensitivity analyses. DISCUSSION: This trial aims to provide definitive evidence on the effect prophylactic dressings have on the development of hospital-acquired sacral pressure injuries in medical-surgical patients. A parallel economic evaluation of pressure injury prevention and treatment will enable evidence-informed decisions and policy. The inclusion of a process evaluation will help to explain the contextual factors that may have a bearing on trial results including the acceptability of the dressings to patients and staff. The trial commenced 5 March 2020 and has been significantly delayed due to COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTR ACTRN12619000763145. Prospectively registered on 22 May 2019.

Pressure Injury Management in Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19 in a Makeshift Hospital in Indonesia: A Report of Two Cases.

ABSTRACT: Patients who are critically ill with COVID-19 need ventilation support in the ICU. However, ICU patients are at higher risk of developing a pressure injury (PI). Unfortunately, PI prevention is not optimally implemented in Indonesia, especially in the makeshift hospitals created during the COVID-19 pandemic. Here, the authors report two cases of critically ill patients with COVID-19 who developed large sacral PIs during hospitalization in a makeshift hospital in Indonesia. The first patient developed a stage 3, 7 × 7-cm sacral PI on the 14th day of hospitalization. The second patient developed a stage 4, 12 × 8-cm sacral PI on the 16th day of hospitalization. Both patients had elevated d-dimer levels and used a noninvasive ventilator for 1 week. The wounds were treated with surgical debridement, silver hydrogel dressing, and hydrocolloid dressing and complemented with static air mattress overlay. The authors recommend that in situations where there is a shortage of healthcare workers, the government should provide pressure-redistribution devices and silicone foam dressings for all critically ill patients to prevent PI development and lighten the workload of healthcare workers.

EffEctiveness of Prophylactic fOam dressings in the prevention of saCral pressure injuries in at-risk hospitalised patients: The EEPOC Trial (preprint)

Background Prophylactic dressings are increasingly used to prevent pressure injuries in hospitalised patients. However, evidence regarding the effectiveness of these dressings is still emerging. This trial aims to determine the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a prophylactic silicone foam border dressing in preventing sacral pressure injuries in medical-surgical patients.Methods This is a multicentre, pragmatic, parallel group, randomised controlled trial. A sample size of 1,320 was calculated to have > 90% power to detect a 5% difference in the primary outcome at an alpha of 0.05. Adult patients admitted to participating medical-surgical wards are screened for eligibility: ≥18 years; admitted to hospital within the previous 36 hours; expected length of stay of ≥ 24 hours and assessed high risk for hospital acquired pressure injury. Consenting participants are randomly allocated to either prophylactic silicone foam dressing intervention or usual care without any dressing as the control group via a web-based randomisation service independent of the trial. Patients are enrolled across three Australian hospitals. The primary outcome is the cumulative incidence of patients who develop a sacral pressure injury. Secondary outcomes include time to sacral pressure injury, incidence of severity (stage) of sacral pressure injury, cost-effectiveness of dressings, and process evaluation. Participant outcomes are assessed daily for up to 14 days by blinded independent outcome assessors using deidentified, digitally modified sacral photographs. Those who develop a sacral pressure injury are followed for an additional 14 days to estimate the costs of pressure injury treatment. Analysis of clinical outcomes will be based on intention-to-treat, per-protocol, and sensitivity analyses.Discussion This trial aims to provide definitive evidence on the effect prophylactic dressings have on development of hospital acquired sacral pressure injuries in medical-surgical patients. A parallel economic evaluation of pressure injury prevention and treatment will enable evidence-informed decisions and policy. The inclusion of a process evaluation will help to explain the contextual factors that may have a bearing on the results of the trial including acceptability of the dressings to patients and staff. The trial commenced 5 March 2020 but has been significantly delayed due to COVID-19.Trial registration: ANZCTR, prospectively registered 22 May 2019: ACTRN12619000763145