Radiological perspective of the formation of pressure ulcers – A comparison of pressure and experience on two imaging surfaces.

This poster is published under an open license. Please read the disclaimer for further details.

Congress:

ECR 2015

Poster Number:

C-1282

Type:

Scientific Exhibit

Keywords:

Soft tissues / Skin, Conventional radiography, Treatment effects, Biological effects

Authors:

C. Everton¹, S. Bird¹, W. Brito², P. Collé³, P. A. Franco⁴, S. Lutjeber³, K. Nodeland⁵, S. Rième², S. Angmorterh¹, M. Siddika⁶, A. England⁷, K. Szczepura¹, P. Hogg¹; ¹Salford/UK, ²Lausanne/CH, ³Groningen/NL, ⁴Lisbon/PT, ⁵Oslo/NO, ⁶Oldham/UK, ⁷Manchester/UK

DOI:

10.1594/ecr2015/C-1282

DOI-Link:

https://dx.doi.org/10.1594/ecr2015/C-1282

Fig. 2: Table showing total average bodu presure, and peak and average presure for...

Fig. 3: Graph comparing average pressure in mmHg for each of the jeopardy areas for...

Fig. 4: Graph comparing peak pressure in mmHg for each of the jeopardy areas for both...

Fig. 1: Image depicting aquisition of mean peak value for the sacrum.

Aims and objectives

Many medical imaging procedures, especially interventional, can take up to 20 minutes or more (1). Patients are required to lie completely still during image acquisition, any movement could render resultant images diagnostically unacceptable. Whitley et al (2) argued that movement during x-ray procedures is a major contributor to loss of diagnostic value, leading to repeat examinations, and can increase the prospect of the patient having a negative experience. Studies have shown that sustained interface pressure, for more than 20 minutes, can cause tissue breakdown (5)....

Methods and materials

Ethical Approval This study was approved by the ethics committee of the College of Health and Social Care of the University of Salford, Manchester, UK. Study Design and Setting This study used pressure mapping equipment and software to measure interface pressures of 38 healthy participants whilst lying still on two medical imaging surfaces. The experiment was conducted in the medical imaging laboratory of the Escola Superior de Tecnologia da Saúde de Lisboa in Portugal during the Erasmus OPTIMAX 2014 Summer School. Sample A convenience sample...

Results

Pressure - The data sample of 30 healthy participants was analysed. The sample included 24 females (80%) and 6 males (20%) with an age range from 19 to 51 (mean=25.77; SD=7.72) and a BMI range from 18.7 to 33.6 (mean 24.12; SD=3.29). The average pressure of both surfaces is presented in Figure 2. The results indicate a significant difference (P<0.001) in average IP between the different imaging surfaces showing a higher average pressure on the x-ray table with a mean difference of 11.95mmHg (Fig 2)....

Conclusion

The results obtained confirm that the average IP for whole body and average IP of the triple jeopardy areas were higher on the hard surface. All of the IP values recorded for the mattress surface showed an improvement when compared to the hard surface (Fig 5 & Fig 6). It is therfore suggested thatthe inclusion of radiolucent mattresses could reduce average pressure on the jeopardy areas to below the accepted PU formation benchmark of 90mmHg. Bony prominences may need a thicker or higher specification mattress...

Personal information

References

1. Westbrook C, Kaut Roth C. MRI in practice. 4th ed. John Wiley & sons; 2011. 2. Whitley S, Sloane C, Hoadley G, Moore AD, Alsop C. 12th ed. (2005) Clark's positioning in radiography. Hodder Arnold:London 3. Dharmarajan TS, T UJ. Pressure Ulcers; clinical features and management. Clin Rehabil. 2003;17:504–11. 4. Vanderwee K, Clark M, Dealey C, Gunningberg L, Defloor T. Pressure ulcer prevalence in Europe; a pilot study. J Eval Clin Pract [Internet]. 2005;13:227–35. Available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2006.00684.x/abstract 5. Stinson MD, Porter-Armstrong a P, Eakin...