MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1097/asw.0000000000000516

Медицинская библиотека · Advances in skin & wound care · 2026

Evaluation of Pressure Injuries in Intensive Care Units: A Point Prevalence Study in a City Hospital.

Erciyas Aysegul, Yazici Gulay, Demirden Eristi Elif, Surel Aziz A

СтатьяПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prevalence of pressure injuries (PIs) in intensive care units (ICUs).

METHODS

This descriptive point prevalence study was conducted in 43 adult ICUs of the General Hospital, Cardiovascular Hospital, Orthopedics and Neurology Hospital, and Oncology Hospital of the City Hospital in Turkey. The study population consisted of 705 patients who were hospitalized in the adult ICUs of the City Hospital on May 2, 2024; of those, 632 patients agreed to participate. Data were collected using a patient information form and the Braden Risk Assessment Scale.

RESULTS

Overall, 45.1% of the patients were at high risk for PI, 28.8% had a PI, and 12.9% had a PI originating from an external center. The prevalence of PI in this population was 12.8%. Pressure injuries occurred most frequently in the sacral region (38.8%) and the most frequent staging was stage 2 (34.5%). The Braden Risk Assessment Scale was used in 100% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Pressure injuries represent system-level issues. Sustainable prevention requires strengthened education, improved nurse-to-patient ratios, reduced workload, and enhanced holistic care practices alongside ongoing training efforts within intensive care settings.

Для цитирования: Erciyas Aysegul, Yazici Gulay, Demirden Eristi Elif, Surel Aziz A. Evaluation of Pressure Injuries in Intensive Care Units: A Point Prevalence Study in a City Hospital.. Advances in skin & wound care. 2026. DOI: 10.1097/asw.0000000000000516.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.