Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Ulcer Classification System (ulcer + classification_system)
Kinds of Ulcer Classification System Selected AbstractsEPUAP classification system for pressure ulcers: European reliability studyJOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING, Issue 6 2007Dimitri Beeckman Abstract Title.,EPUAP classification system for pressure ulcers: European reliability study Aim., This paper is a report of a study of the inter-observer reliability of the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel pressure ulcer classification system and of the differential diagnosis between moisture lesions and pressure ulcers. Background., Pressure ulcer classification is a valuable tool to provide a common description of ulcer severity for the purposes of clinical practice, audit and research. Despite everyday use of the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel system, its reliability has been evaluated in only a limited number of studies. Methods., A survey was carried out between September 2005 and February 2006 with a convenience sample of 1452 nurses from five European countries. Respondents classified 20 validated photographs as normal skin, blanchable erythema, pressure ulcers (four grades), moisture lesion or combined lesion. The nurses were familiar with the use of the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel classification scale. Results., Pressure ulcers were often classified erroneously (, = 0·33) and only a minority of nurses reached a substantial level of agreement. Grade 3 lesions were regularly classified as grade 2. Non-blanchable erythema was frequently assessed incorrectly as blanchable erythema. Furthermore, the differential diagnosis between moisture lesions and pressure ulcers appeared to be complicated. Conclusion., Inter-observer reliability of the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel classification system was low. Evaluation thus needs to focus on both the clarity and complexity of the system. Definitions and unambiguous descriptions of pressure ulcer grades and the distinction between moisture lesions will probably enhance clarity. To simplify the current classification system, a reduction in the number of grades is suggested. [source] A systematic review of interrater reliability of pressure ulcer classification systemsJOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, Issue 3 2009Jan Kottner Aims., To review systematically the interrater reliability of pressure ulcer classification systems to find out which classification should be used in daily practice. Background., Pressure ulcer classification systems are important tools in research and practice. They aim at providing accurate and precise communication, documentation and treatment decisions. Pressure ulcer classifications are criticised for their low degree of interrater reliability. Design., Systematic review. Methods., The data bases MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the World Wide Web were searched. Original research studies estimating interrater reliability of pressure ulcer classification systems were included. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment was conducted independently by two reviewers. Results., Twenty-four out of 339 potentially relevant studies were included in the final data synthesis. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies a meaningful comparison was impossible. Conclusions., There is at present not enough evidence to recommend a specific pressure ulcer classification system for use in daily practice. Interrater reliability studies are required, in which comparable raters apply different pressure ulcer classification systems to comparable samples. Relevance to clinical practice., It is necessary to determine the interrater reliability of pressure ulcer classifications among all users in clinical practice. If interrater reliability is low the use of those systems is questionable. On the basis of this review there are no recommendations as to which system is to be given preference. [source] | ||||||||||