The current situation of risk assessment and scale applicating of neonatal pressure injury
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1672-7088.2019.36.008
- VernacularTitle: 新生儿压力性损伤风险评估现状及评估量表应用分析
- Author:
Yujie WU
1
;
Jianping WANG
2
;
Junying LYU
2
;
Fei SONG
1
;
Shuanghong ZHANG
1
;
Liping ZHANG
3
Author Information
1. The Graduate Office of the Second Clinical College, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325035, China
2. Department of Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325027, China
3. Department of Clinical Skill Training, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325027, China
- Publication Type:Clinical Trail
- Keywords:
Pressure injury;
Intensive care unit, neonatal;
Tool;
Cross-sectional studies
- From:
Chinese Journal of Practical Nursing
2019;35(36):2836-2839
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To investigate the current situation of risk assessment of neonatal pressure injury (PI) and using of the assessment scale from 8 hospitals in Zhejiang Province,providing reference for further improvement of the scale.
Methods:A cross-sectional study was used to investigate 184 nurses in the department of neonatal intensive care unit admitted to 8 hospitals in Zhejiang Province by using a self-made questionnaire.
Results:Three of the eight hospitals did not use scale for neonatal PI assessment routinely. Of the remaining five hospitals, three hospitals used Neonatal Skin Risk Assessment Scale (NSRAS), one hospital used Braden Q Pediatric Skin Risk Assessment Scale (Pediatric Braden Q Scale) and one hospital used Neonatal/Infant Braden Q scale (Neonatal/Infant Braden Q Scale). 129 nurses from 5 hospitals evaluated the scales routinely used by the department.Nearly 93.80% (121/129) of the nurses thought the scales were easy to understand, 76.74% (99/129) of the nurses thought the scales were easy to measure, 76.74% (99/129) of the nurses thought the scales were good at predicting, 75.19% (97/129) of the nurses thought the scales were suitable for newborns, 37.21% (48/129) of the nurses thought the scales did not adequately assess the severity of the condition, 34.11% (44/129) of the nurses thought the scales did not adequately assess the medical device factors, 24.81% (32/129) of the nurses thought the scales scores were not clearly defined.
Conclusion:The use of risk assessment scale for neonatal PI has not been unified yet, and the three scales need to be improved. The department should pay attention to the risk assessment of newborn PI and strengthen the awareness of PI prevention.
