ArticleInternational wound journal2024
Implementation of the REPRISE care bundle model for the prevention of pressure ulcers in an intensive care unit: An experimental study.
Article in International wound journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effects of nursing care package implementation on pressure injuries prevention in the intensive care unit.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Implementation of the REPRISE care bundle model for the prevention of pressure ulcers in an intensive care unit: An experimental study.International wound journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the REPRISE care bundle (CB) model for pressure ulcer (PU) prevention in intensive care patients and to determine the impact of the training provided to nurses on their knowledge base and attitudes. This study has an experimental design. The study was conducted in the anaesthesia and resuscitation intensive care unit on a total of 72 patients. The prevalence of PU was compared between the control group and the REPRISE-CB group. For the nurses, 50 nurses working in the ICU were included in the study. The nurses' knowledge and attitudes towards PU were compared before and after the training. The data were analysed using a statistical program. The incidence of IW was significantly lower in the intervention group (13.9%) compared to the control group (38.9%) (p < 0.05). The study showed that oedema, low albumin levels, low mean blood pressure and low Braden Scale scores were significant risk factors for the development of PU. In addition, the training provided to nurses was found to significantly improve their knowledge and attitudes (p < 0.05). It was concluded that REPRISE-CB was effective in the prevention of PU and that nurses' knowledge increased with training.
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.