ArticleHealth science reports2025
Evaluation of Nurses' Knowledge of Incontinence-Associated Dermatitis Among Acute Care Nurses: A Multi-Center Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Health science reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: This study examined how well nurses across various acute care hospitals in Saudi Arabia understand and manage incontinence-associated dermatitis (IAD), shedding light on existing knowledge gaps and clinical practices. Methods: A descriptive, cross-sectional design was employed, with a total of 169 nurses recruited between January and July 2024. A psychometrically validated instrument, the Know-IAD tool was used in a self-administered online format to collect data and assess nurses' knowledge across three key dimensions: (i) causes and external contributing factors, (ii) classification and diagnosis, and (iii) prevention and management of IAD. Results: Overall, participants demonstrated a low level of understanding, with total scores falling below 70% in all domains. A considerable proportion of participants answered incorrectly on key factors such as skin inspection identifiers and the appropriate use of all-in-one large pads. An image depicting IAD Category 1B was correctly identified by 89 participants (52.6%), while 119 participants (70.4%) correctly identified Category 2/Stage 2 pressure injury. Furthermore, only about 50% of nurses responded correctly to the item on conducting skin inspections every 48 h for incontinent patients. Knowledge domain scores were significantly associated with qualification and area of work, and moderately correlated with age. Conclusion: The study recommends an urgent need for enhanced education, standardized protocols, and improved clinical practices to support accurate diagnosis, prevention, and optimal management of IAD in Saudi healthcare settings.
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.