ArticleJournal of the American Medical Directors Association2026
Nursing Home Nursing Staff Perspective About Using Subepidermal Moisture Technology for Pressure Injury Prevention.
Article in Journal of the American Medical Directors Association, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPressure injuries (PrIs) represent a persistent challenge in nursing homes, with facility-acquired rates of 8.5%. Subepidermal moisture (SEM) technology offers promise for early detection across all skin tones, yet remains underadopted in nursing home environments. PURPOSE: This qualitative study examined nursing home staff perceptions of SEM technology implementation using Rogers's Diffusion of Innovation theoretical framework to understand the overall adoption process.
methodsSeven focus groups were conducted across 5 nursing homes with 50 staff members (registered nurses, licensed practical nurses, and certified nursing assistants) who had used SEM equipment during an 8-month intervention. Two facilities participated in temporal assessments at months 1 and 8. A directed qualitative content analysis was performed using 6 a priori codes derived from Diffusion of Innovation theory: observability, trialability, compatibility, relative advantage, and complexity.
resultsAnalysis of 80 unique participant quotes yielded 132 coded instances across innovation characteristics. Notably, 68% of coded examples reflected negative perceptions of the technology, contrasting sharply with typical health care innovation adoption patterns. Key barriers included poor compatibility with existing workflows (35% of instances), implementation complexity extending beyond device operation (31%), mixed observability of benefits (32%), and concerns about relative advantage amid resource constraints (26%). Technology inflexibility prevented error correction and workflow adaptation (25%), whereas sustainability concerns emerged regarding long-term viability (17%). Temporal assessment revealed declining enthusiasm and compliance rates over the intervention period.
conclusionsDespite SEM technology's clinical potential, significant implementation barriers hindered adoption in resource-constrained nursing home environments. Findings highlight the critical importance of addressing workflow integration, organizational context, and staff burden when implementing health care innovations. Future implementation strategies must explicitly address resource constraints and develop comprehensive support systems that minimize workflow disruption while maintaining technology effectiveness.
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.