Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26778371›Full record

ArticleJournal of tissue viability2016

Pressure ulcer and wounds reporting in NHS hospitals in England part 1: Audit of monitoring systems.

Isabelle L Smith, Jane Nixon, Sarah Brown, Lyn Wilson, Susanne Coleman

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of tissue viability, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
23.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Factors Associated with a High-Risk Profile for Developing Pressure Injuries in Long-Term Residents of Nursing Homes.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Isabelle L SmithLeeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK. Electronic address: i.l.smith@Leeds.ac.uk.
Jane NixonLeeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.
Sarah BrownLeeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.
Lyn WilsonLeeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK; Mid Yorkshire Hospital NHS Trust, Wakefield, UK.
Susanne ColemanLeeds Institute of Clinical Trials Research, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK.
University of Leeds · GBMid Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Internationally, health-care systems have attempted to assess the scale of and demonstrate improvement in patient harms. Pressure ulcer (PU) monitoring systems have been introduced across NHS in-patient facilities in England, including the Safety Thermometer (STh) (prevalence), Incident Reporting Systems (IRS) and the Strategic Executive Information System (STEIS) for serious incidents. This is the first of two related papers considering PU monitoring systems across NHS in-patient facilities in England and focusses on a Wound Audit (PUWA) to assess the accuracy of these systems. Part 2 of this work and recommendations are reported pp *-*. The PUWA was undertaken in line with 'gold-standard' PU prevalence methods in a stratified random sample of NHS Trusts; 24/34 (72.7%) invited NHS Trusts participated, from which 121 randomly selected wards and 2239 patients agreed to participate. PREVALENCE OF EXISTING PUS: The PUWA identified 160 (7.1%) patients with an existing PU, compared to 105 (4.7%) on STh. STh had a weighted sensitivity of 48.2% (95%CI 35.4%-56.7%) and weighted specificity of 99.0% (95%CI 98.99%-99.01%). EXISTING/HEALED PUS: The PUWA identified 189 (8.4%) patients with an existing/healed PU compared to 135 (6.0%) on IRS. IRS had an unweighted sensitivity of 53.4% (95%CI 46.3%-60.4%) and unweighted specificity of 98.3% (95%CI 97.7%-98.8%). 83 patients had one or more potentially serious PU on PUWA and 8 (9.6%) of these patients were reported on STEIS. The results identified high levels of under-reporting for all systems and highlighted data capture challenges, including the use of clinical staff to inform national monitoring systems and the completeness of clinical records for PUs.

Indexed as

Monitoring, PhysiologicPressure UlcerWounds and InjuriesEnglandHumansMedical AuditRisk ManagementState MedicineAdverse eventIncident reportingPatient safetyPressure ulcerPrevalenceSensitivity

Identifiers

PMID26778371
OpenAlexW2178876274

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.