ArticleNursing open2025
An Evaluation of Nurses' Compliance With Pressure Ulcer and Fall Risk Assessments.
Article in Nursing open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An Evaluation of Nurses' Compliance With Pressure Ulcer and Fall Risk Assessments.Nursing open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimPressure ulcers (PUs) and falls are two major issues following patient hospitalisation. They result in a series of complications affecting patients, families, and healthcare. Many factors can lead to PUs and falls. The absence of proper assessments of their etiologies exacerbates these issues. Mapping the road to effective assessment is crucial for the right interventions to be implemented according to each patient's needs. This study aims to provide an overall estimate of nurse compliance with PU and fall risk assessments on hospital admission and indicate the degree of variation in compliance rates across different hospital units.
methodsFollowing the STROBE guidelines a retrospective descriptive design was utilised and included all patients for 2022.
resultsThe results showed the general compliance with PU and fall risk assessments and indicated that intensive care units (medical/surgical and burn units) had the highest rate of compliance, which exceeded 97% with the PU assessment. Male wards (surgical and orthopaedic) wards demonstrated low compliance with the PU assessment (69% and 80.6%, respectively). Regarding the fall risk assessment, the surgical, orthopaedic, and medical wards had the lowest rates of compliance with an average of 69%, but the neurosurgery ward had a 95.6% compliance rate. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTIONS: Incidences of PUs and falls are essential quality indicators. This research highlights units' characteristics and their compliance with the assessments. Hospital-based assessment is crucial for identifying gaps in assessment and implementing proper interventions. Proper interventions not only improve patient outcomes but also enhance the overall quality of care within the healthcare system. By regularly evaluating these assessments, hospitals can better allocate resources and streamline processes to address patient needs more effectively.
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.