Pressure Injury Outcomes of a Prone-Positioning Protocol in Patients With COVID and ARDS.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 outbreak, standard methods for treating acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) were used for patients presenting with ARDS. One such treatment method involves placing patients prone to improve oxygenation and reduce mortality risk. Challenges in preventing pressure injuries in patients placed prone have been reported, and no studies have explored the effects of including a certified wound and skin care nurse as part of the care team on the incidence of pressure injuries in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with ARDS. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the association between including a certified wound and skin care nurse on a multiprofessional pronation team and prevention of pressure injuries in SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with ARDS. METHODS: This multicenter observational cohort study used retrospective data from the electronic health record. The intervention group consisted of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients diagnosed with ARDS who were treated by a multidisciplinary prone-positioning team that included a certified wound and skin care nurse specialist. The comparison group of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients with ARDS was treated by a multidisciplinary prone-positioning team that did not include a certified wound and skin care nurse specialist. RESULTS: As shown by multivariable logistic regression mixed-effect modeling, patients in the intervention group had a 97% lower adjusted odds ratio of a pressure injury developing than did patients in the comparison group (0.03 [95% CI, 0.01-0.14]; P < .001). CONCLUSION: The inclusion of a certified wound and skin care nurse on a multiprofessional prone-positioning team significantly reduced the odds of pressure injuries developing in patients infected with SARS-CoV-2.

Clinical measurement of mechanical ankle instability.

Clinicians commonly use the anterior draw test (ligament laxity) and distal fibular position (lateral malleolus displacement), to measure ankle instability. The purpose of this study was to establish intra-rater and inter-rater reliability for the anterior draw test and distal fibular position in a clinical setting. The anterior draw test (AD) was measured with a plastic Goniometer, and was defined as the linear displacement of the foot as it is drawn anteriorly with the ankle held in 20 degrees of plantar-flexion. Distal fibular position (DFP) was measured in standing using a digital vernier caliper and was the relative linear distance between the lateral and the medial malleoli. 20 participants aged 21-28 volunteered for the study and were measured on both ankles. It was found that Intra-tester reliability (ICC) ranged from 0.88 to 0.97 for AD and DFP; while inter-tester reliability (ICC) was 0.6 for AD and 0.77 for DFP. In addition for measures across trials, the standard error of the measurement (SEM) was, on average 0.66 mm for AD and 1.7 mm for DFP. While the limits of agreement (LOA) was ±0.17 mm for AD and ±4.03 mm for DFP. However, the SEM and LOA between testers was 2.27 mm and ±2.27 mm respectively for AD; and for 3.1 mm and ±10.4 mm for DFP. Overall the results suggest that both measures, as defined in this study exhibit moderate to good reliability and low standard error of measurement, suggesting a high degree of repeatability across trials.