ArticleInternational wound journal2022
Skin tear prevalence in an Australian acute care hospital: A 10-year analysis.
Article in International wound journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use of Oxygen-Enriched Oil Dressings in Wound Management: A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Risk and factors related to the development of lesions due to xerosis in hospitalized elderly people.Investigacion y educacion en enfermeria · 2025Article
- Knowledge status of skin tear prevention and its demographic and occupational influencing factors: A National cross-sectional survey among nurses.Journal of advanced nursing · 2025Article
- The Turkish version of the Skin Tear Knowledge Assessment Instrument (OASES): Validity and reliability study.International wound journal · 2024Article
- A retrospective study of inpatients diagnosed with degloving skin and soft tissue injuries.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Skin tear prevalence in an Australian acute care hospital: A 10-year analysis.International wound journal · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hospital-acquired skin tear prevalence is under-reported; thus, the aim of this study was to analyse skin tear point prevalence and characteristics in a tertiary acute care hospital in Queensland, Australia, over a 10-year period. All consenting adult inpatients received a full skin inspection and skin tear category, site, cause, treatment, and whether it was documented as hospital- or community-acquired were recorded. Eleven prevalence audits were analysed with a total sample of 3626 patients. An overall pooled prevalence of 8.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.5-10.4) with an associated hospital-acquired pooled prevalence of 5.5% (95% CI 4.5-6.7) was found. In total, 616 skin tears were reported, of which 374 (60.7%) were hospital-acquired. Over a third of patients (38.7%) had multiple skin tears and most patients (84.8%) with at least one skin tear were aged ≥70 years. The largest proportion of skin tears (40.1%) was those with no skin flap. Of those documented, most were caused by falls or collisions, suggesting combined skin tear and falls prevention strategies may be effective. Over a decade, there was a downward trend in hospital-acquired skin tear, which is encouraging. Skin tear prevalence is recommended as a measure of care quality with an emphasis on good quality documentation.
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.