Preventing Pressure Ulcers: A Multisite Randomized Controlled Trial in Nursing Homes.

BACKGROUND: Pressure at the interface between bony prominences and support surfaces, sufficient to occlude or reduce blood flow, is thought to cause pressure ulcers (PrUs). Pressure ulcers are prevented by providing support surfaces that redistribute pressure and by turning residents to reduce length of exposure. OBJECTIVE: We aim to determine optimal frequency of repositioning in long-term care (LTC) facilities of residents at risk for PrUs who are cared for on high-density foam mattresses. METHODS: We recruited residents from 20 United States and 7 Canadian LTC facilities. Participants were randomly allocated to 1 of 3 turning schedules (2-, 3-, or 4-hour intervals). The study continued for 3 weeks with weekly risk and skin assessment completed by assessors blinded to group allocation. The primary outcome measure was PrU on the coccyx or sacrum, greater trochanter, or heels. RESULTS: Participants were mostly female (731/942, 77.6%) and white (758/942, 80.5%), and had a mean age of 85.1 (standard deviation [SD] ± 7.66) years. The most common comorbidities were cardiovascular disease (713/942, 75.7%) and dementia (672/942, 71.3%). Nineteen of 942 (2.02%) participants developed one superficial Stage 1 (n = 1) or Stage 2 (n = 19) ulcer; no full-thickness ulcers developed. Overall, there was no significant difference in PrU incidence (P = 0.68) between groups (2-hour, 8/321 [2.49%] ulcers/group; 3-hour, 2/326 [0.61%]; 4-hour, 9/295 [3.05%]. Pressure ulcers among high-risk (6/325, 1.85%) versus moderate-risk (13/617, 2.11%) participants were not significantly different (P = 0.79), nor was there a difference between moderate-risk (P = 0.68) or high-risk allocation groups (P = 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: Results support turning moderate- and high-risk residents at intervals of 2, 3, or 4 hours when they are cared for on high-density foam replacement mattresses. Turning at 3-hour and at 4-hour intervals is no worse than the current practice of turning every 2 hours. Less frequent turning might increase sleep, improve quality of life, reduce staff injury, and save time for such other activities as feeding, walking, and toileting.

Turning for Ulcer Reduction (TURN) Study: An Economic Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The Turning for Ulcer Reduction (TURN) study was a multisite, randomized controlled trial that aimed to determine the optimal frequency of turning nursing facility residents with mobility limitations who are at moderate and high risk for pressure ulcer (PrU) development. Here we present data from the economic analysis. OBJECTIVES: This economic analysis aims to estimate the economic consequences for Ontario of switching from a repositioning schedule of 2-hour intervals to a schedule of 3-hour or 4-hour intervals. DATA SOURCES: Costs considered in the analysis included those associated with nursing staff time spent repositioning residents and with incontinent care supplies, which included briefs, barrier cream, and washcloths. RESULTS: The total economic benefit of switching to 3-hour or 4-hour repositioning is estimated to be $11.05 or $16.74 per day, respectively, for every resident at moderate or high risk of developing PrUs. For a typical facility with 123 residents, 41 (33%) of whom are at moderate or high risk of developing PrUs, the total economic benefit is estimated to be $453 daily for 3-hour or $686 daily for 4-hour repositioning. For Ontario as a whole, assuming that there are 77,933 residents at 634 LTC facilities, 25,927 (33%) of whom are at moderate or high risk of developing PrUs, the total economic benefits of switching to 3-hour or 4-hour repositioning are estimated to be $286,420 or $433,913 daily, respectively, equivalent to $104.5 million or $158.4 million per year. LIMITATIONS: We did not consider the savings the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care might incur should less frequent repositioning reduce the incidence of work-related injury among nursing staff, so our findings are potentially conservative. CONCLUSIONS: A switch to 3-hour or 4-hour repositioning appears likely to yield substantial economic benefits to Ontario without placing residents at greater risk of developing PrUs.

Turning for Ulcer ReductioN: a multisite randomized clinical trial in nursing homes.

OBJECTIVES: To determine optimal repositioning frequency of nursing home (NH) residents at risk for pressure ulcers (PrUs) when cared for on high-density foam mattresses. DESIGN: Multisite, randomized, clinical trial, known as Turning for Ulcer ReductioN (TURN Study). SETTINGS: NHs in the United States (n = 20) and Canada (n = 7) using high-density foam mattresses. PARTICIPANTS: Consenting residents (N = 942) aged 65 and older without PrUs at moderate (scores 13-14) or high (scores 10-12) risk of PrUs according to the Braden Scale. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomly allocated using risk stratification (moderate vs high) to a repositioning schedule (2, 3, or 4 hour) for 3 weeks. Blinded assessors assessed skin weekly. MEASUREMENTS: PrU incidence (coccyx or sacrum, trochanter, heels). RESULTS: Participants were mostly female (77.6%) and Caucasian (80.5%) and had a mean age of 85.1 ± 7.7. The most common diagnoses were cardiovascular (76.9%) and dementia (72.5%). Nineteen (2.0%) participants developed superficial PrUs. There was no significant difference (Wilcoxon test for ordered categories) in PrU incidence (P = .68) according to repositioning group (2 hour, 8/321, 2.5%; 3 hour, 2/326, 0.6%; 4 hour, 9/295, 3.1%), nor was there a statistically significant difference in the incidence of PrU between the high and moderate-risk groups (P = .79). Also, PrU incidence was not statistically significantly different between high-risk participants based on repositioning schedule (6/325, 1.8%, P = .90) or between moderate-risk participants based on repositioning schedule (13/617, 2.1%, P = .68). CONCLUSION: There was no difference in PrU incidence over 3 weeks of observation between those turned at 2-, 3-, or 4-hour intervals in this population of residents using high-density foam mattresses at moderate and high risk of developing PrUs when they were repositioned consistently and skin was monitored. This finding has major implications for use of nursing staff and cost of NH care.