Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40258628›Full record

ArticleInternational wound journal2025

Construction of Medical Device-Related Pressure Injury Risk Assessment Tool for Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine: A Multi-Centre Prospective Study.

Yan-Qiao Bao, Mo Fu, Liang-Huan Yu, Luo Qun, Yan-Ping Lei, Jing-Jing Li, Jun Liu, Lin Li, Wen-Wen Cui, Run-Yi Zhou and 1 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in International wound journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

11 authors.

Yan-Qiao BaoThe First College of Clinical Medical Science, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-7323-6020
Mo FuJingzhou Hospital Affiliated to Yangtze University, Jingzhou, China.
Liang-Huan YuThe First College of Clinical Medical Science, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, China.
Luo QunThe First College of Clinical Medical Science, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, China.
Yan-Ping LeiThe First College of Clinical Medical Science, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, China.
Jing-Jing LiThe First College of Clinical Medical Science, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, China.
Jun LiuThe First College of Clinical Medical Science, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, China.
Lin LiThe First College of Clinical Medical Science, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, China.
Wen-Wen CuiThe First College of Clinical Medical Science, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, China.
Run-Yi ZhouChina Three Gorges University, Yichang, China.
Fei-Fan WangThe First College of Clinical Medical Science, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, China.

Funding

Construction of Risk Assessment Tools for Medical Device-Related Pressure InjuryJingzhou Medical and Health Science and Technology Project 2023HC49
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To construct and validate the risk assessment tool of medical device-related pressure injury (MDRPI) for Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine (PCCM), help clinical medical staff to quickly and effectively screen high-risk groups and provide a reference for the development of targeted early intervention measures. The department of PCCM mainly treats elderly patients and patients with chronic diseases of the respiratory system, and frequently uses oxygen therapy devices, monitors and treatment pipelines. It is a high-risk department for MDRPI. Once MDRPI occurs, it is not easy to heal and may lead to various complications and affect the disease prognosis. At present, there is no specialised assessment tool for PCCM patients. A multi-centre prospective study. We collected data from 932 PCCM patients who used medical devices in three Grade III Class A Comprehensive Hospitals from November 2022 to October 2023. Of those, 652 cases were assigned to the modelling and 280 to the verification groups. Logistic regression was used to construct the model. The AUC was used to test the predictive effect of the model. The risk assessment tool was constructed with the OR (odds ratio) value obtained by binary Logistic multi-variate regression analysis. Verification groups were used for validated the risk assessment tool. The factors entered into the prediction model were use of nasal catheter, high flow oxygen therapy, non-invasive ventilation, invasive ventilation, having chronic respiratory disease, using hormonal drugs, sedative drugs and abnormal skin condition. The prediction model was transformed into a risk assessment tool, and the OR values were rounded to form the MDRPI risk assessment tool with the values ranging from 0 to 66 points. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) is 0.861, and the maximum value of Youden index (YI) is 0.606, corresponding to a sensitivity of 80.6%, specificity of 80.0% and a cut-off value of 17, divided patients into low risk ≤ 17 and high risk > 17. The risk assessment tool applied to the clinic, and the accuracy was 92.75%. The risk assessment tool can provide clinical guidance and predict the risk of MDRPI for PCCM patients. Clinical nurses in PCCM can use the risk assessment tool to assess the risk of MDRPI occurrence and provide a reference for preventive measures.

Indexed as

Critical CareEquipment and SuppliesPressure UlcerPulmonary MedicineAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRisk Assessmentmedical device related pressure injury (MDRPI)Nomograpulmonary and critical care medicine (PCCM)risk assessment toolrisk prediction model

Identifiers

PMID40258628
PMCPMC12011423

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.