Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36418122›Full record

Observational studyBMJ open2022

Prevalence of skin pressure injury in critical care patients in the UK: results of a single-day point prevalence evaluation in adult critically ill patients.

Francesca Rubulotta, Stephen Brett, Carole Boulanger, Bronagh Blackwood, Mieke Deschepper, Sonia O Labeau, Stijn Blot, UK Collaborating Site Investigators, DecubICUs study team and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine Trials’ Group UK Collaborators

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03270345 (Multicentre International One-Day Prevalence Study on Pressure Injuries in Intensive Care Units), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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.

NCT03270345 completednot on this map

Multicentre International One-Day Prevalence Study on Pressure Injuries in Intensive Care Units

TypeobservationalSponsorEuropean Society of Intensive Care MedicineRan2018 to 2018Enrolled13,340ConditionsPressure Injury
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Prophylactic Sacral Dressing in Prevention of Pressure Injury among ICU Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Francesca RubulottaIntensive Care Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada frubulot@ic.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-8644-1728
Stephen BrettAnaesthetics and Intensive Care, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4545-8413
Carole BoulangerRoyal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust, Exeter, UK.
Bronagh BlackwoodWellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4583-5381
Mieke DeschepperUniversitair Ziekenhuis Gent, Gent, Belgium.
Sonia O LabeauGhent University, Gent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-3863-612X
Stijn BlotGhent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-2145-0345
UK Collaborating Site Investigators
DecubICUs study team and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine Trials’ Group UK Collaborators
Ghent University Hospital · BEGhent University · BEImperial College London · GBMontreal General Hospital · CAQueen's University Belfast · GBRoyal Devon & Exeter NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesHospital-acquired pressure injuries (PIs) are a source of morbidity and mortality, and many are potentially preventable.

designThis study prospectively evaluated the prevalence and the associated factors of PIs in adult critical care patients admitted to intensive care units (ICU) in the UK.

settingThis service evaluation was part of a larger, international, single-day point prevalence study of PIs in adult ICU patients. Training was provided to healthcare givers using an electronic platform to ensure standardised recognition and staging of PIs across all sites.

participantsThe characteristics of the ICUs were recorded before the survey; deidentified patient data were collected using a case report form and uploaded onto a secure online platform. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Factors associated with ICU-acquired PIs in the UK were analysed descriptively and using mixed multiple logistic regression analysis.

resultsData from 1312 adult patients admitted to 94 UK ICUs were collected. The proportion of individuals with at least one PI was 16% (211 out of 1312 patients), of whom 8.8% (n=115/1312) acquired one or more PIs in the ICU and 7.3% (n=96/1312) prior to ICU admission. The total number of PIs was 311, of which 148 (47.6%) were acquired in the ICU. The location of majority of these PIs was the sacral area, followed by the heels. Braden score and prior length of ICU stay were associated with PI development.

conclusionsThe prevalence and the stage of severity of PIs were generally low in adult critically ill patients admitted to participating UK ICUs during the study period. However, PIs are a problem in an important minority of patients. Lower Braden score and longer length of ICU stay were associated with the development of injuries; most ICUs assess risk using tools which do not account for this. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03270345.

Indexed as

Critical CareCritical IllnessPressure UlcerAdultHospital MortalityHumansPrevalenceUnited KingdomAdult anaesthesiaAdult intensive & critical careAUDITPREVENTIVE MEDICINE

Identifiers

PMID36418122
PMCPMC9685232
OpenAlexW4309821983

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.