Digital Photography: a Tool for Nursing on the Assessment of Pressure Lesions

Olga L. Cortés, Paula A. Alvarado, Yudy A. Rojas, Luz Dary Salazar, Ximena Acuña, Maribel Esparza

Abstract


Objective. This work sought to assess the inter-observer agreement among expert nurses by using digital photographs and between these experts and the nursing registries in the electronic clinical record in the identification and degree of PL.

Methods. This was an observational study, including 225 photographic records (184 patients, 97 with pressure lesion and 128 registries without lesion) randomly selected from the total of photographs registered in the PENFUP clinical trial (without lesion). Three expert evaluators assessed said photographs in masked manner. The notes from nursing of patients included related with the description of PL were evaluated. The Kappa index was calculated along with the composite agreement ratio for each evaluation. Results. Good agreement was observed among expert evaluators of photographic records on the presence of PL and between good-moderate for the degree of PL (I-II). Likewise, upon evaluating the agreement between the nursing registries of PL and the photographic assessment of the three expert evaluators of the same areas, good agreement was observed to determine the presence of PL and moderate agreement for the degrees of PL.

Conclusion. Photographic records are a tool that permits recognizing the types of wounds, as well as the visualization of the different layers of skin injured. The study highlights the importance of assessment and validation by experts, given that it permits identifying existing problems that can lead to the underestimation or overestimation of PL when conducted by a single caregiver.

Descriptors: pressure ulcer; nursing assessment; reproducibility of results; nursing records; observer variation; electronic health records; photography.

 

How to cite this article: Cortés OL, Alvarado PA, Rojas YA, Salazar LD, Acuña X. Digital Photography: a Tool for Nursing on the Assessment of Pressure Lesions. Invest. Educ. Enferm. 2018; 36(2):e07.


Full Text:

PDF ENGLISH ESPAÑOL Video

References


(1) National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel and Pan Pacific Pressure Injury Alliance. Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers: Clinical Practice Guideline. Emily Hester (Ed). Cambridge Media: Perth, Australia; 2014.

(2) González-Consuegra RV, Cardona-Mazo DM, Murcia-Trujillo PA, Matiz-Vera GD. Estudio de prevalencia de úlceras por presión en Colombia: Informe preliminar. Rev. Fac. Med. 2014; 62(3):369-77.

(3) Webster J, Lister C, Corry J, Holland M, Coleman K, Marquart L. Incidence and Risk Factors for Surgically Acquired Pressure Ulcers: A Prospective Cohort Study Investigators. J. Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2015; 42(2):138-44.

(4) Setoguchi Y, Ghaibeh AA, Mitani K, Abe Y, Hashimoto I, Moriguchi H. Predictability of Pressure Ulcers Based on Operation Duration, Transfer Activity, and Body Mass Index through the Use of an Alternating Decision Tree. J. Med. Invest. 2016 63(3-4):248-55.

(5) Borghardt Andressa Tomazini, Prado TN, Bicudo SDS, Castro DS, Bringuente MEO. Úlcera por pressão em pacientes críticos: incidência e fatores associados. Rev. Bras. Enferm. 2016; 69(3):460-7.

(6) Moore Z. US Medicare data show incidence of hospital-acquired pressure ulcers is 4.5%, and they are associated with longer hospital stay and higher risk of death. Evid. Based Nurs. 2013; 16(4):118-9.

(7) Moore Z, Cowman S. Pressure ulcer prevalence and prevention practices in care of the older person in the Republic of Ireland. J. Clin. Nurs. 2012; 21:362–71.

(8) Whittington KT, Briones R. National prevalence and incidence study: 6-year sequential acute care data. Adv. Skin Wound Care. 2004; 17(9):490–4.

(9) Gallagher P, Barry P, Hartigan I, McCluskey P, O’Connor K, O’Connor M. Prevalence of pressure ulcers in three university teaching hospitals in Ireland. J. Tissue Viability. 2008; 17(4):103–9.

(10) Moore ZEH, Webster J. Dressings and topical agents for preventing pressure ulcers. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2013; 18(8): CD009362.

(11) González RV, López WJ, Roa KT. Epidemiología de lesiones de piel relacionadas con el cuidado: estudio de la prevalencia en Colombia. Rev. Enferm. Referência. 2017; 15(4):65-72.

(12) Walker R, Huxley L, Juttner M, Burmeister E, Scott J, Aitken L.MA Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Using Prophylactic Dressings to Minimize Sacral Pressure Injuries in High-Risk Hospitalized Patients. Clin. Nurs. Res. 2017; 26(4):484-503.

(13) Ministerio de Salud y Protección Social. Prevención Ulceras por presión; Guía técnica “Buenas prácticas para la seguridad del paciente en la atención en salud”. Capítulo 7: Marco teórico [Internet]. Bogotá: El Ministerio; 2015 [cited 18 May 2018]. Available from: https://www.minsalud.gov.co/sites/rid/Lists/BibliotecaDigital/RIDE/DE/CA/prevenir-ulceras-por-presion.pdf

(14) National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel and Pan Pacific Pressure Injury Alliance Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers: Quick Reference Guide. (NPUAP-EPUAP-PPPIA) [Internet]. 2014 [cited 18 May 2018]. Available from: http://gneaupp-1fb3.kxcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/NPUAP-EPUAP-PPPIA-Quick-Reference-Guide-2014.pdf

(15) Registered Nurses’ Association of Ontario (RNAO). Risk assessment & prevention of pressure ulcers. (Revised). Toronto, Canada: Registered Nurses’ Association of Ontario. 2011 [cited 18 May 2018]. Available from: http://rnao.ca/bpg/guidelines/risk-assessment-and-prevention-pressure-ulcers.

(16) Valls-Matarín J, Del Cotillo-Fuente M,Pujol-Vila M, Ribal-Prior R, Sandalinas-Mulero I. Diferenciación entre lesiones cutáneas asociadas a la humedad y úlceras por presión mediante el uso de fotografías en un área de críticos. Enferm. Clin. 2016; 26:268-74.

(17) Campo A, Herazo E. Concordancia intra- e inter-evaluadores. Rev. Colomb. Psiquiatr. 2010; 39(2):424-32.

(18) Cortés E, Rubio-Romero JA, Gaitán-Duarte H. Métodos estadísticos de evaluación de la concordancia y la reproducibilidad de pruebas diagnósticas. Rev. Colomb. Obst. Ginecol. 2009; 61(3); 247-55.

(19) Sebastián-Viana T, González-Ruiz JM, Núñez-Crespo F, Lema-Lorenzo I, Gadea-Romero G, Losa-Iglesias ME. La validez de un registro clínico de úlceras por presión. An. Sist. San. Navarra. 2014; 37(1):17-24.

(20) Thompson N, Gordey L, Bowles H, Parslow N, Houghton P. Reliability and validity of the revised photographic wound assessment tool on digital images taken of various types of chronic wounds. Adv. Skin Wound Care. 2013; 26(8):360-74.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.iee.v36n2e07 Abstract : 308 PDF : 537 ENGLISH : 26 ESPAÑOL : 53 Video : 5

Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM


Esta publicación hace parte del Sistema de Revistas de la Universidad de Antioquia
¿Quieres aprender a usar el Open Journal system? Ingresa al Curso virtual
Este sistema es administrado por el Programa Integración de Tecnologías a la Docencia
Universidad de Antioquia
Powered by Public Knowledge Project