FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

Incidence of hospital‐acquired pressure injuries and predictors of severity in a paediatric hospital

Abstract

Background

Hospital-acquired pressure injuries (HAPIs) pose significant challenges in healthcare and cause increased patient suffering, longer hospital stays, and higher healthcare costs. Paediatric patients face unique risks, but evidence remains scarce. This study aimed to identify and describe HAPI admission incidence and severity predictors in a large Australian children's hospital.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study investigated all paediatric patients between January 2020 and December 2021 using a census approach. Demographic and clinical data including HAPI-related data were accessed from the incident monitoring and hospital administration databases. The incidence rate (per 1000 patient admissions) was calculated based on all admissions. Predictors of HAPI severity were identified using multivariable multinomial logistic regression. The study adhered to the STROBE guidelines for retrospective cohort studies.

Results

The HAPI incidence rate was 6.96 per 1000 patient admissions. Of the age groups, neonates had the highest HAPI incidence (15.5 per 1000 admissions). Critically ill children had the highest rate for admission location (12.8 per 1000 patient admissions). Most reported cases were stage I (64.2%). Age was associated with injury severity, with older paediatric patients more likely to develop higher-stage HAPIs. Additionally, Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander patients had a higher HAPI severity risk.

Conclusion

HAPI injuries in paediatric patients are unacceptably high. Prevention should be prioritized, and the quality of care improved in Australia and beyond. Further research is needed to develop targeted prevention strategies for these vulnerable populations.

Implications for the Profession and Patient Care

This research emphasizes the need for standardized reporting, culturally sensitive care and tailored prevention strategies.

Impact

The research has the potential to influence healthcare policies and practices, ultimately enhancing the quality of patient care.

Reporting Method

STROBE guidelines.

No Patient or Public Contribution

There was no patient or public contribution to the conduct of this study.

Study to evaluate the readability and visual appearance of online resources for blunt chest trauma: an evaluation of online resources using mixed methods

Por: Hutchings · H. A. · Cochrane · M. · Battle · C.
Objectives

Blunt chest trauma (BCT) is characterised by forceful and non-penetrative impact to the chest region. Increased access to the internet has led to online healthcare resources becoming used by the public to educate themselves about medical conditions. This study aimed to determine whether online resources for BCT are at an appropriate readability level and visual appearance for the public.

Design

We undertook a (1) a narrative overview assessment of the website; (2) a visual assessment of the identified website material content using an adapted framework of predetermined key criteria based on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services toolkit and (3) a readability assessment using five readability scores and the Flesch reading ease score using Readable software.

Data sources

Using a range of key search terms, we searched Google, Bing and Yahoo websites on 9 October 2023 for online resources about BCT.

Results

We identified and assessed 85 websites. The median visual assessment score for the identified websites was 22, with a range of –14 to 37. The median readability score generated was 9 (14–15 years), with a range of 4.9–15.8. There was a significant association between the visual assessment and readability scores with a tendency for websites with lower readability scores having higher scores for the visual assessment (Spearman’s r=–0.485; p

Conclusions

Although the readability levels and visual appearance were acceptable for the public for many websites, many of the resources had much higher readability scores than the recommended level (8–10) and visually were poor.

Better use of images would improve the appearance of websites further. Less medical terminology and shorter word and sentence length would also allow the public to comprehend the contained information more easily.

❌