ArticleInternational wound journal2017
A quality control circle process to improve implementation effect of prevention measures for high-risk patients.
Article in International wound journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Construction and application of procedural pathways combined with information management in nursing staff skills training system.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- A quality control circle process to improve enteral nutrition feeding support in discharged patients with colorectal cancer.Frontiers in nutrition · 2023Article
- Effect of Quality Control Circle Activity Nursing Combined with Respiratory Function Exercise Nursing on Patients with Esophageal Cancer.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2022Article
- The application of quality control circle to improve the quality of samples: A SQUIRE-compliant quality-improving study.Medicine · 2020Article
- Application of Quality Control Circle in Promoting the Use of Rubber Dams in the Root Canal Treatment of Primary Teeth.BioMed research international · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to analyse the influence of prevention measures on pressure injuries for high-risk patients and to establish the most appropriate methods of implementation. Nurses assessed patients using a checklist and factors influencing the prevention of a pressure injury determined by brain storming. A specific series of measures was drawn up and an estimate of risk of pressure injury determined using the Braden Scale, analysis of nursing documents, implementation of prevention measures for pressure sores and awareness of the system both before and after carrying out a quality control circle (QCC) process. The overall scores of implementation of prevention measures ranged from 74.86 ± 14.24 to 87.06 ± 17.04, a result that was statistically significant (P < 0.0025). The Braden Scale scores ranged from 8.53 ± 3.21 to 13.48 ± 3.57. The nursing document scores ranged from 7.67 ± 3.98 to 10.12 ± 1.63; prevention measure scores ranged from 11.48 ± 4.18 to 13.96 ± 3.92. Differences in all of the above results are statistically significant (P < 0.05). Implementation of a QCC can standardise and improve the prevention measures for patients who are vulnerable to pressure sores and is of practical importance to their prevention and control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.