Welcome to NGC. Skip directly to: Search Box, Navigation, Content.
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
A direct comparison of the John A. Hartford Foundation (JHF); National Collaborating Centre for Nursing and Supportive Care, National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NCCNSC/NICE); Registered Nurses Association of Ontario (RNAO); and Wound, Ostomy, and Continence Nurses Society (WOCN) recommendations for prevention of pressure ulcers is provided in the tables below. Two topics, skin tears (addressed by JHF) and treatment of pressure ulcers (addressed by WOCN), are not included in this synthesis.
Table 1 compares the scope of each of the guidelines. Table 2 compares recommendations for risk assessment and interventions to prevent pressure ulcers. Prevention interventions compared in the tables include skin care and protection, positioning, pressure-reducing devices, nutrition, education, and other interventions. Table 3 compares the potential benefits and harms associated with the implementation of each guideline.
The level of evidence supporting the major recommendations is also identified, with the definitions of the rating schemes used by NCCNSC/NICE, RNAO, and WOCN included in Table 4. The JHF guideline does not identify the level of evidence supporting its recommendations, but provides rationale in narrative format. References supporting selected recommendations of the JHF guideline are also provided in Table 4.
Following the content comparison tables, the areas of agreement and differences among the guidelines are identified.
Abbreviations:
TABLE 1: COMPARISON OF SCOPE AND CONTENT | |
---|---|
Objective And Scope | |
JHF (2003) |
|
NCCNSC/NICE (2003) |
|
RNAO (2005) |
|
WOCN (2003) |
|
Target Population | |
JHF (2003) |
|
NCCNSC/NICE (2003) |
Note: The guideline does not include recommendations on the treatment of existing pressure ulcers. |
RNAO (2005) |
|
WOCN (2003) |
|
Intended Users | |
JHF (2003) |
Advanced Practice Nurses |
NCCNSC/NICE (2003) |
Allied Health Personnel |
RNAO (2005) |
Advanced Practice Nurses |
WOCN (2003) |
Advanced Practice Nurses |
Interventions And Practices Considered | |
JHF (2003) |
Risk Assessment
Prevention
Note: This guideline also addresses prevention and treatment of skin tears. |
NCCNSC/NICE (2003) |
Risk Assessment
Prevention
Note: This guideline also includes organizational and policy recommendations. |
RNAO (2005) |
Risk Assessment
Prevention
Note: This guideline also includes organizational and policy recommendations. |
WOCN (2003) |
Risk Assessment
Prevention
Note: This guideline also addresses treatment of pressure ulcers. See the NGC guideline synthesis, Management and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers. |
TABLE 2: COMPARISON OF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE ASSESSMENT AND PREVENTION OF PRESSURE ULCERS | |
---|---|
Assessment | |
JHF (2003) |
Parameters of Assessment
Nursing Care Strategies/Interventions Risk Assessment Documentation
General Care Issues and Interventions
|
NCCNSC/NICE (2003) |
Identifying Individuals Vulnerable to or at Elevated Risk of Pressure Ulcers 3 - Assessing an individual's risk of developing pressure ulcers should involve both informal and formal assessment procedures. 3 - Risk assessment should be carried out by personnel who have undergone appropriate training to recognise the risk factors that contribute to the development of pressure ulcers and know how to initiate and maintain correct and suitable preventative measures. 3 - The timing of risk assessment should be based on each individual case. However, it should take place within 6 hours of the start of admission to the episode of care. 3 - If an individual is considered not to be vulnerable to or at elevated risk of pressure ulcers on initial assessment, reassessment should occur if there is a change in an individual's condition that increases risk (see recommendations under "Risk Factors" below). 3 - All formal assessments of risk should be documented/recorded and made accessible to all members of the interdisciplinary team. Use of Risk Assessment Tools 1 - Risk assessment tools should only be used as an aide memoire and should not replace clinical judgment. If use of a risk assessment tool is preferred (to assist clinical judgment), it is recommended that a scale that has been tested for use in the same specialty is chosen. Risk Factors 2 - An individual's potential to develop pressure ulcers may be influenced by the following intrinsic risk factors, which therefore should be considered when performing a risk assessment:
2 - The following extrinsic risk factors are involved in tissue damage and should be removed or diminished to prevent injury: pressure, shearing, and friction. 2 - The potential of an individual to develop pressure ulcers may be exacerbated by the following factors, which therefore should be considered when performing a risk assessment: medication and moisture to the skin. |
RNAO (2005) |
Assessment A head-to-toe skin assessment should be carried out with all clients at admission, and daily thereafter for those identified at risk for skin breakdown. Particular attention should be paid to vulnerable areas, especially over bony prominences. (Level of Evidence = IV) The client's risk for pressure ulcer development is determined by the combination of clinical judgment and the use of a reliable risk assessment tool. The use of a tool that has been tested for validity and reliability, such as the Braden Scale for Predicting Pressure Sore Risk, is recommended. Interventions should be based on identified intrinsic and extrinsic risk factors and those identified by a risk assessment tool, such as Braden's categories of sensory perception, mobility, activity, moisture, nutrition, friction, and shear. Risk assessment tools are useful as an aid to structure assessment. (Level of Evidence = IV) Clients who are restricted to bed and/or chair, or those experiencing surgical intervention, should be assessed for pressure, friction, and shear in all positions and during lifting, turning, and repositioning. (Level of Evidence = IV) All pressure ulcers are identified and staged using the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP) criteria. (Level of Evidence = IV) If pressure ulcers are identified, utilization of the Registered Nurses Association of Ontario (RNAO) best practice guideline Assessment and Management of Stage I to IV Pressure Ulcers is recommended. (Level of Evidence = IV) All data should be documented at the time of assessment and reassessment. (Level of Evidence = IV) |
WOCN (2003) |
Assessment Several risk assessment tools are available that consist of subscales for determining risk score. The Braden and the Norton scales have been the most extensively studied. The Braden Scale has six subscales: sensory perception, moisture, activity, mobility, nutrition, friction, and shear. The Norton Scale consists of five subscales: physical condition, mental state, activity, mobility, and incontinence. (See Appendices B-D in the original guideline document for risk assessment scales.
|
PREVENTION | |
Skin Care and Protection | |
JHF (2003) |
Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (now known as the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, AHRQ) (AHCPR, 1992) prevention recommendations:
Other care issues and interventions
|
NCCNSC/NICE (2003) |
Skin Inspection 3 - Skin inspection should occur regularly and the frequency determined in response to changes in the individual's condition in relation to either deterioration or recovery. 3 - Skin inspection should be based on an assessment of the most vulnerable areas of risk for each patient. These are typically: heels; sacrum; ischial tuberosities; parts of the body affected by anti-embolic stockings; femoral trochanters; parts of the body where pressure, friction, or shear is exerted in the course of an individual's daily living activities; parts of the body where there are external forces exerted by equipment and/or clothing; elbows; temporal region of the skull; shoulders; back of head; and toes. Other areas should be inspected as necessitated by the patient's condition. 3 - Individuals who are willing and able should be encouraged, following education, to inspect their own skin. 3 - Individuals who are wheelchair users should use a mirror to inspect the areas that they cannot see easily or get others to inspect them. 3 - Healthcare professionals should be aware of the following signs, which may indicate incipient pressure ulcer development: persistent erythema; non-blanching hyperaemia previously identified as non-blanching erythema; blisters; discolouration; localised heat; localised oedema; and localised induration. In those with darkly pigmented skin: purplish/bluish localised areas of skin; localised heat that, if tissue becomes damaged, is replaced by coolness; localised oedema; and localised induration. 3 - Skin changes should be documented/recorded immediately. |
RNAO (2005) |
A head-to-toe skin assessment should be carried out with all clients at admission, and daily thereafter for those identified at risk for skin breakdown. Particular attention should be paid to vulnerable areas, especially over bony prominences. (Level of Evidence = IV) Avoid massage over bony prominences. (Level of Evidence = IIb) Protect and promote skin integrity:
(Level of Evidence = IV) Protect skin from excessive moisture and incontinence:
(Level of Evidence = IV) |
WOCN (2003) |
|
Positioning and Pressure-Relieving Devices | |
JHF (2003) |
Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (now known as the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, AHRQ) (AHCPR, 1992) prevention recommendations:
Other care issues and interventions
Staff should use a lift sheet or mechanical lifting device to move patient.
Interventions Linked to Braden Cutscores (Adapted from Ayello & Braden, 2001) Prevention protocols linked to Braden cutscores are as follows: At risk: score of 15 to 18
Moderate risk: score of 13 to 14
High risk: score of 10 to 12
Very high risk: score of 9 or below
|
NCCNSC/NICE (2003) |
Positioning 3 - Individuals who are vulnerable to or at elevated risk of pressure ulcer development should be repositioned and the frequency of repositioning determined by the results of skin inspection and individual needs, not by a ritualistic schedule. 3 - Repositioning should take into consideration other relevant matters, including the patient's medical condition, their comfort, the overall plan of care, and the support surface. 3 - Positioning of patients should ensure that prolonged pressure on bony prominences is minimised, bony prominences are kept from direct contact with one another, and friction and shear damage is minimised. 3 - A repositioning schedule, agreed with the individual, should be recorded and established for each person vulnerable to pressure ulcers. 3 - Individuals or carers, who are willing and able, should be taught how to redistribute weight. 3 - Manual handling devices should be used correctly in order to minimise shear and friction damage. After manoeuvring, slings, sleeves, or other parts of the handling equipment should not be left underneath individuals. Seating 3 - Seating assessments for aids and equipment (otherwise known as assistive technologies) should be carried out by trained assessors who have the acquired specific knowledge and expertise (for example, physiotherapists or occupational therapists). 3 - Advice from trained assessors with acquired specific knowledge and expertise should be sought about correct seating positions. 3 - Positioning of individuals who spend substantial periods of time in a chair or wheelchair should take into account distribution of weight, postural alignment, and support of feet. D - The management of a patient in a sitting position is important. Even with appropriate pressure relief, it may be necessary to restrict sitting time to less than 2 hours until the condition of an individual with an elevated risk changes. 3 - No seat cushion has been shown to perform better than another, so this guideline makes no recommendation about which type to use for pressure redistribution. Use of Aids 3 - The following should not be used as pressure-relieving aids: water-filled gloves, synthetic sheepskins, doughnut-type devices. Patient Factors to Consider in Selecting a Pressure-Relieving Device D - Decisions about which pressure-relieving device to use should be based on cost considerations and an overall assessment of the individual. Holistic assessment should include all of the following and should not be based solely on scores from risk assessment tools:
Provision for All Individuals Vulnerable to Pressure Ulcers B - All individuals assessed as being vulnerable to pressure ulcers should, as a minimum provision, be placed on a high-specification foam mattress with pressure-relieving properties Patients at Elevated Risk of Developing Pressure Ulcers D - Although there is no research evidence that high-tech pressure relieving mattresses and overlays are more effective than high-specification (low-tech) foam mattresses and overlays, professional consensus recommends that consideration should be given to the use of alternating pressure or other high-tech pressure-relieving systems:
Patients Undergoing Surgery D - All individuals undergoing surgery and assessed as being vulnerable to pressure ulcers should, as a minimum provision, be placed on either a high-specification foam theatre mattress or other pressure-redistributing surface. Repositioning and 24-hour Approach to Provision of Pressure-Relieving Devices D - The provision of pressure-relieving devices needs a 24-hour approach. It should include consideration of all surfaces used by the patient. D - Support surface and positioning needs should be assessed and reviewed regularly and determined by results of skin inspection, patient comfort, ability, and general state. Thus repositioning should occur when individuals are on pressure relieving devices. Coordinated Time Specified Approach D - A pressure ulcer reduction strategy should incorporate a coordinated approach to the acquisition, allocation, and management of pressure-relieving equipment. The time elapsing between assessment and use of the device should be specified in this strategy. |
RNAO (2005) |
For clients with an identified risk for pressure ulcer development, minimize pressure through the immediate use of a positioning schedule. (Level of Evidence = IV) Use proper positioning, transferring, and turning techniques. Consult Occupational Therapy/Physiotherapy (OT/PT) regarding transfer and positioning techniques and devices to reduce friction and shear and to optimize client independence. (Level of Evidence = IV) Clients at risk of developing a pressure ulcer should not remain on a standard mattress. A replacement mattress with low interface pressure, such as high-density foam, should be used. (Level of Evidence = Ia) For high risk clients experiencing surgical intervention, the use of pressure-relieving surfaces intraoperatively should be considered. (Level of Evidence = Ia) For individuals restricted to bed:
(Level of Evidence = IV) For individuals restricted to chair:
(Level of Evidence = IV) |
WOCN (2003) |
|
Nutrition | |
JHF (2003) |
Manage nutrition:
|
NCCNSC/NICE (2003) |
No recommendations provided. |
RNAO (2005) |
A nutritional assessment with appropriate interventions should be implemented on entry to any new health care environment and when the client's condition changes. If a nutritional deficit is suspected:
|
WOCN (2003) |
Perform nutritional assessment on entry into a new healthcare setting and whenever there is a change in the individual's condition that may increase the risk of malnutrition. Level of evidence = C. Assess laboratory parameters to determine nutritional status, which may include albumin or pre-albumin, transferring, and total lymphocyte count. Level of evidence = C. Assess nutrition to measure effectiveness of nutritional interventions. Level of evidence = C. Maintain adequate nutrition that is compatible with the patient's wishes or condition to maximize the potential for healing. Level of evidence = C. |
Patient, Caregiver and Professional Education | |
JHF (2003) |
Other care issues and interventions Teach patient, caregivers, and staff the prevention protocols |
NCCNSC/NICE (2003) |
Education and Information-giving D - All healthcare professionals should be educated about:
D - Individuals vulnerable to or at elevated risk of developing pressure ulcers and their carers should be informed verbally and in writing about:
|
RNAO (2005) |
Education Recommendations Educational programs for the prevention of pressure ulcers should be structured, organized, and comprehensive and should be updated on a regular basis to incorporate new evidence and technologies. Programs should be directed at all levels of health care providers including clients, family or caregivers. (Level of Evidence = III) The educational program for prevention of pressure ulcers should be based on the principles of adult learning, the level of information provided and the mode of delivery. Programs must be evaluated for their effectiveness in preventing pressure ulcers through such mechanisms as quality assurance standards and audits. Information on the following should be included:
(Level of Evidence = III) |
WOCN (2003) |
Patient/Caregiver Education Educate patients and caregivers about the causes and risk factors for pressure ulcer development and ways to minimize risk. Level of Evidence = C. The patient or caregiver, or both, should understand the importance of the following:
|
Other Prevention Activities | |
JHF (2003) |
No recommendations provided. |
NCCNSC/NICE (2003) |
No recommendations provided. |
RNAO (2005) |
An individualized plan of care is based on assessment data, identified risk factors, and the client's goals. The plan is developed in collaboration with the client, significant others, and health care professionals. (Level of Evidence = IV) The nurse uses clinical judgment to interpret risk in the context of the entire client profile, including the client's goals. (Level of Evidence = IV) Consider the impact of pain. Pain may decrease mobility and activity. Pain control measures may include effective medication, therapeutic positioning, support surfaces, and other non-pharmacological interventions. Monitor level of pain on an on-going basis, using a valid pain assessment tool. (Level of Evidence = IV) Consider the client's risk for skin breakdown related to the loss of protective sensation or the ability to perceive pain and to respond in an effective manner (e.g., impact of analgesics, sedatives, neuropathy, etc.) (Level of Evidence = IV) Consider the impact of pain on local tissue perfusion (Level of Evidence = IV) Institute a rehabilitation program, if consistent with the overall goals of care and the potential exists for improving the individual's mobility and activity status. Consult the care team regarding a rehabilitation program. (Level of Evidence = IV) Advance notice should be given when transferring a client between setting (e.g., hospital to home/long-term care facility/hospice/residential care) if pressure reducing/relieving equipment is required to be in place at time of transfer (e.g., pressure relieving mattresses, seating, special transfer equipment). Transfer to another setting may require a site visit, client/family conference, and/or assessment for funding of resources to prevent the development of pressure ulcers. (Level of Evidence = IV) Clients moving between care settings should have the following information provided:
(Level of Evidence = IV) |
WOCN (2003) |
No recommendations provided. |
TABLE 4: EVIDENCE RATING SCHEMES AND REFERENCES | |
---|---|
JHF (2003) |
REFERENCES SUPPORTING THE RECOMMENDATIONS
|
NCCNSC/NICE (2003) |
Levels of Evidence I: Evidence from meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials or at least one randomised controlled trial II: Evidence from at least one controlled trial without randomisation or at least one other type of quasi-experimental study III: Evidence from non-experimental descriptive studies, such as comparative studies, correlation studies, and case-control studies IV: Evidence from expert committee reports or opinions and/or clinical experience of respected authorities *Recommendation Grades A: Directly based on category I evidence B: Directly based on:
C: Directly based on:
D: Directly based on:
**Grading Scheme Evidence 1: Generally consistent finding in a majority of multiple acceptable studies 2: Either based on a single acceptable study, or a weak or inconsistent finding in multiple acceptable studies 3: Limited scientific evidence that does not meet all the criteria of acceptable studies or absence of directly applicable studies of good quality. This includes expert opinion. *From Eccles M, Mason J. (2001) How to develop cost conscious guidelines. Health Technology Assessment 5(16). **Adapted from Waddell G, Feder G, McIntosh A, et al (1996) Low Back Pain Evidence Review. London: Royal College of General Practitioners. |
RNAO (2005) |
Levels of Evidence Ia Evidence obtained from meta-analysis or systematic review of randomized controlled trials Ib Evidence obtained from at least one randomized controlled trial IIa Evidence obtained from at least one well-designed controlled study without randomization IIb Evidence obtained from at least one other type of well-designed quasi-experimental study without randomization III Evidence obtained from well-designed non-experimental descriptive studies, such as comparative studies, correlation studies, and case studies IV Evidence obtained from expert committee reports or opinions and/or clinical experiences of respected authorities |
WOCN (2003) |
The type of evidence is identified for selected recommendations (see "Major Recommendations" field) and defined as follows: Level A: Two or more supporting randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on lower extremity arterial disease (LEAD) in humans (at Levels I or II), meta-analysis of RCTs, or Cochrane Systematic Review of RCTs Level B: One or more supporting controlled trials on lower extremity arterial disease in humans or two or more supporting trials in an animal model (at Level III) Level C: One supporting controlled trial, at least two supporting case series that were descriptive studies on humans, or expert opinion Where a level of evidence rating is not included, the information presented represents a consensus of the panel members |
The John A. Hartford Foundation (JHF), National Collaborating Centre for Nursing and Supportive Care, National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NCCNSC/NICE), Registered Nurses Association of Ontario (RNAO), and Wound, Ostomy, and Continence Nurses Society (WOCN) present recommendations for prevention of pressure ulcers. NCCNSC/NICE, RNAO, and WOCN rank the level of evidence for each major recommendation, and JHF offers literature citations to support their major recommendations. In addition, JHF, RNAO, and WOCN provide explicit reasoning behind their judgments in narrative form.
The guidelines differ somewhat in scope. In addition to addressing pressure ulcer prevention, JHF provides recommendations for skin tear risk assessment and prevention, NCCNSC/NICE and RNAO consider organizational and policy issues, and WOCN discusses treatment of pressure ulcers. Additionally, the RNAO guideline states that their recommendations apply to management of Stage I pressure ulcers.
Three guidelines (JHF, RNAO, and WOCN) either reviewed or explicitly adapted recommendations from a guideline developed by the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Policy and Research (now the U.S. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality), Pressure Ulcers in Adults: Prediction and Prevention (1992). (NGC note: The AHCPR guideline does not meet criteria for inclusion in the National Guidelines Clearinghouse because it is more than five years old).
All the guidelines agree on the need for timely assessment of pressure ulcer risk and most explicitly recommend a combination of informal (i.e., clinical judgment) and formal (i.e., use of a risk assessment tool) methods. As a formal risk assessment method, use of a standardized tool is recommended by all the guidelines. The Braden Scale and the Norton Scale are mentioned as appropriate instruments by JHF, RNAO, and WOCN. Some differences between the guidelines concerning use of such tools are discussed below. All guidelines also agree on the need for reassessment when a patient's clinical condition changes, or on a regular basis for high-risk patients.
All four guidelines address skin care as a prevention intervention and recommend regular assessment, with JHF, RNAO, and WOCN recommending daily assessment of skin. NCCNSC/NICE does not address specific skin protection interventions, but otherwise there is overall agreement that keeping the skin dry and moisturized is an important prevention step. All three guidelines that address skin protection stress the need to avoid vigorous massage, especially over bony prominences. All four guidelines address the need to protect the skin from friction and shear, particularly during transfer and repositioning, as well as the need to manage moisture from incontinence. RNAO and WOCN specifically recommend establishing a bowel and bladder program for incontinent patients.
Recommendations concerning positioning and pressure-relieving devices are similar across the guidelines, with all noting the need for frequent repositioning of bed-bound and chair-bound patients and the need to use pressure-reducing mattresses and positioning devices such as wedges and pillows. Of note are that JHF, NCCNSC/NICE, and RNAO recommend use of a written repositioning schedule; NCCNSC/NICE, RNAO, and WOCN specifically cite the need for use of a pressure-relieving mattress during surgery for at-risk patients; and all four guidelines caution against the use of doughnut-type devices, which can cause venous congestion and edema.
JHF, RNAO, and WOCN consider the need for adequate nutrition as a part of pressure ulcer prevention. JHF cites the need for adequate hydration, protein, calories, and vitamins A, C, and E. Two guidelines, JHF and RNAO, recommend consultation with a dietitian to assess nutritional needs and develop a nutritional support plan.
JHF, NCCNSC/NICE, and RNAO consider the need for education aimed at patients, carers, and professional staff, while WOCN includes recommendations concerning patient and carer education. JHF and RNAO state that educational programs should be structured, organized, comprehensive, and directed at all levels of healthcare providers, patients, and families or caregivers. RNAO stresses the importance of incorporating updated information and new technologies into educational programs.
RNAO notes that pain has an impact on the risk for developing pressure ulcer by limiting a patient's mobility and, therefore, needs to be assessed and managed. RNAO also includes recommendations for creating a plan of care and a plan for transferring patients to another location. RNAO recommends implementing a rehabilitation program, when feasible, to improve patient mobility.
While all the guidelines include use of a standardized tool as a component of risk assessment, the guidelines differ concerning how much these tools should be relied on to guide interventions. JHF recommends that prevention protocols should be implemented based on scoring of the risk assessment tool. RNAO notes that the Braden and Norton scales have been tested sufficiently for reliability and validity and are useful adjuncts to nursing assessments and care planning, but nonetheless recommends that interventions be based on both a standardized instrument and clinical judgment, including identification of extrinsic and intrinsic risk factors. NCCNSC/NICE is the most cautious concerning use of risk assessment instruments, citing research that indicates routine use of these scales leads to inefficient use of preventive measures. The NCCNSC/NICE guideline therefore explicitly recommends that risk assessment scales be used only as an aide memoire and not as a replacement for clinical judgment.
This Synthesis was prepared by ECRI on October 31, 2006. The information was verified by UIGN on November 21, 2006, by AMDA and WOCN on December 5, 2006, and by RNAO on December 11, 2006. This summary was updated by ECRI Institute on July 30, 2007 following the withdrawal of the Singapore Ministry of Health guideline from the NGC Web site. This synthesis was updated on December 12, 2007 to remove UIGN recommendations.
Internet citation: National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC). Guideline synthesis: Pressure Ulcer Prevention. In: National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC) [website]. Rockville (MD): 2006 Dec (revised 2007 Dec). [cited YYYY Mon DD]. Available: http://www.guideline.gov.