Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41668287›Full record

ReviewInternational wound journal2026

Pressure Injuries and Skin Failure: The Search for Clarity.

Jeffrey M Levine

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International wound journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

1 author.

Jeffrey M LevineBrookdale Department of Geriatrics & Palliative Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9947-709X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Skin failure is increasingly recognised across healthcare settings, yet its definition, diagnostic criteria and relationship to pressure injuries remain inconsistent with little interdisciplinary consensus. This lack of clarity complicates bedside assessment, documentation and quality reporting. Historically, pressure injuries were viewed as preventable events associated with inadequate care, but growing evidence shows that some wounds develop despite optimal preventive measures, particularly in patients with multimorbidity or limited physiological reserve. This article will review the historical development of skin failure and how it is intertwined with contrasting theories of pressure injury formation that began in the 19th century. We will track the proliferation of definitions and overlapping terms that muddle contemporary documentation and classification, and demonstrate why a unified definition is urgently needed. Skin failure represents the intersection of tissue deformation with systemic vulnerability including hypoperfusion, inflammation, vascular dysfunction, oedema, medication effects, immune compromise, nutritional depletion and age-related changes. A meaningful and practical definition must span all healthcare environments and patient populations, supporting accurate diagnosis and equitable evaluation of care quality. We outline a call to action that includes interdisciplinary consensus, standardised terminology and the development of predictive tools that integrate physiologic data, advanced analytics, and patient-centered outcomes across the healthcare continuum.

Indexed as

Pressure UlcerSkinWound HealingFemaleHumansMalepressure injuriesquality measurement healthcare qualityskin failureterminal ulcerwound care

Identifiers

PMID41668287
PMCPMC12890871

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.