Abstract
The aims of this paper were to compare the predictive validity of three pressure ulcer (PU) risk scales—the Norton scale, the Braden scale, and the Waterlow scale—and to choose the most appropriate calculator for predicting PU risk in surgical wards of India. This is an observational prospective cohort study in a tertiary educational hospital in New Delhi among 100 surgical ward patients from April to July 2011. The main outcomes measured included sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PVP) and negative predictive value (PVN), and the area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of the three PU risk assessment scales. Based on the cutoff points found most appropriate in this study, the sensitivity, specificity, PVP, and PVN were as follows: the Norton scale (cutoff, 16) had the values of 95.6, 93.5, 44.8, and 98.6, respectively; the Braden scale (cutoff, 17) had values of 100, 89.6, 42.5, and 100, respectively; and the Waterlow scale (cutoff, 11) had 91.3, 84.4, 38.8, and 97, respectively. According to the ROC curve, the Norton scale is the most appropriate tool. Factors such as physical condition, activity, mobility, body mass index (BMI), nutrition, friction, and shear are extremely significant in determining risk of PU development (p < 0.0001). The Norton scale is most effective in predicting PU risk in Indian surgical wards. BMI, mobility, activity, nutrition, friction, and shear are the most significant factors in Indian surgical ward settings with necessity for future comparison with established scales.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bolton L (2007) Which pressure ulcer risk assessment scales are valid for use in the clinical setting? J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs 34(4):368–381
Cuddigan J, Ayello EA, Sussman C (2001) Pressure ulcers in America: prevalence, incidence, and implications for the future. National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, Reston, VA
Thein HH, Gomes T, Krahn MD, Wodchis WP (2010) Health status utilities and the impact of pressure ulcers in long-term care residents in Ontario. Qual Life Res 19(1):81–89
Spilsbury K, Nelson A, Cullum N, Iglesias C, Nixon J, Mason S (2007) Pressure ulcers and their treatment and effects on quality of life: hospital inpatient perspectives. J Adv Nurs 57(5):494–504
Davis K (1994) Pressure sores: aetiology, risk factors and assessment scales. Br J Nurs 3:258–261
Kring DL (2007) Reliability and validity of the Braden Scale for predicting pressure ulcer risk. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs 34(4):399–406
Bergstrom N, Braden B, Laguzza A, Holman V (1987) The Braden scale for predicting pressure sore risk. Nurs Res 36:205–210
Gelfand JM et al (2003) In: Freedberg IM et al (eds) Fitzpatrick’s dermatology in general medicine. McGraw-Hill Professional, New York, p 1256
The National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (1989) Pressure ulcers prevalence, cost and risk assessment: consensus development conference statement. Decubitus 2(2):24–28
Alterescu V (1989) The financial costs of inpatient pressure ulcers to an acute care facility. Decubitus 2(3):14–23
Gunningberg L, Lindholm C, Carlsson M, Sjoden P (1999) Implementation of risk assessment and classification of pressure ulcers as quality indicators for patients with hip fractures. J Clin Nurs 8(4):396–406
Pang SM, Wong TK (1998) Predicting pressure sore risk with the Norton, Braden and Waterloo scales in a Hong Kong rehabilitation hospital. Nurs Res 47(3):147–153
Anthony D, Parboteeah S, Saleh M, Papanikolaou P (2008) Norton, Waterlow and Braden scores: a review of the literature and a comparison between the scores and clinical judgement. J Clin Nurs 17(5):646–653
Papanikolaou P, Lyne P, Anthony D (2007) Risk assessment scales for pressure ulcers: a methodological review. Int J Nurs Stud 44(2):285–296
TorraiBou JE, Garca’-Ferna’ndez FP, Pancorbo-Hidalgo PL, Furtado K (2008) Risk assessment scales for predicting the risk of developing pressure ulcers. In: Romanelli M (ed) Science and practice of pressure ulcer management. Springer, London, pp 43–57
Norton D, McLaren R, Exton-Smith AN (1975) An investigation of geriatric nursing problems in hospitals. London 7 National Corporation for the Care of Old people
Waterloo J (1985) Pressure sores: a risk assessment card. Nurs Times 81(48):49–55
Bridel J (1993) Assessing the risk of pressure sores. Nurs Stand 7(25):32–35
MacDonald K (1995) The reliability of pressure sore risk assessment tools. Prof Nurse 11(3):169–172
Wasson JH, Sox HC, Neff RK, Goldman L (1985) Clinical prediction rules. Applications and methodological standards. N Engl J Med 13(13):793–799
Smith DM, Winsemius DK, Besdine RW (1991) Pressure sores in the elderly: can this outcome be improved? J Gen Intern Med 6(1):81–93
Bours GJ, Halfens RJ, Lubbers M, Haalboom JR (1999) The development of a national registration form to measure the prevalence of pressure ulcers in the Netherlands. Ostomy Wound Manage 45(28–33):36–38
Kelly J (2005) Inter-rater reliability and Waterlow’s pressure ulcer risk assessment tool. Nurs Stand 19(32):86–87, 90–92
Lindgren M, Unosson M, Fredrikson M, Ek AC (2004) Immobility—a major risk factor for development of pressure ulcers among adult hospitalized patients: a prospective study. Scand J Caring Sci 18(1):57–64
Lewicki LJ, Mion L, Splane KG, Samstag D, Secic M (1997) Patient risk factors for pressure ulcer during cardiac surgery. AORN J 65(5):933–942
Defloor T (1999) The risk of pressure sores: a conceptual scheme. J ClinNurs 8:206–216
Papantonio CT, Wallop JM, Kolodner KB (1994) Sacral ulcers following cardiac surgery: incidence and risks. Adv Wound Care 7(2):24–36
Feuchtinger J, Halfens RJ, Dassen T (2005) Pressure ulcer risk factors in cardiac surgery: a review of the research literature. Heart Lung 34(6):375–385
Olson B, Langemo D, Burd C, Hanson D, Hunter S, Cathcart-Silberberg T (1996) Pressure ulcer incidence in an acute care setting. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs 23(1):15–22
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kumari, S., Sharma, D., Rana, A. et al. Risk Assessment Tool for Pressure Ulcer Development in Indian Surgical Wards. Indian J Surg 77, 206–212 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-012-0779-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-012-0779-y