The prevalence, management, equipment provision and outcome for patients with pressure ulceration identified in a wound care survey within one English health care district

Abstract 

The prevalence of pressure ulceration within the population receiving health care in Bradford, UK was 0.74 people with a pressure ulcer per 1000 population (95% CI 0.6–0.8). This prevalence includes a number of tertiary referrals and if these are removed the prevalence falls to 0.71 people with a pressure ulcer per 1000 population. Of the pressure ulcers encountered 195 (53.7%) were classed as grade 2 pressure ulcers with 80 grade 3 wounds and 40 grade 4 pressure ulcers. Forty-eight pressure ulcers were identified as grade 1 wounds but the accuracy of this classification may be in doubt given that 24 apparent grade 1 pressure ulcers were reported to have visible wound beds with common reports of slough and granulation tissue. Severe pressure ulcers differed from less severe partial thickness wounds – grade 3 and 4 pressure ulcers tended to be larger, of longer duration, with greater coverage of the wound bed with necrotic tissue and less granulation and epithelial tissue. Wound exudate was heavier where people presented with severe pressure ulcers while there was a greater probability of wound infection (37.5% of grade 4 pressure ulcers were infected). Given these challenges it was perhaps unsurprising that people with severe pressure ulcers were more likely to have been risk assessed, to have had a critical incident form completed (although only 35% of grade 4 pressure ulcers were identified as having been reported on a critical incident form), to be provided with a powered PR mattress in bed and to be dressed with an antimicrobial dressing. The time to treat each severe pressure ulcer tended to be longer than was the treatment times for less severe wounds. Only 40 people with pressure ulcers (11%) as their most serious wound were located in hospital, suggesting that current pressure ulcer epidemiology and costs may be understated given their reliance on previous hospital based surveys of pressure ulcers. Another potential confounder of pressure ulcer epidemiological studies may be the number of nursing home beds in the surveyed population. On breaking down the Bradford audit data by postcode the pressure ulcer prevalence ranged between 0.13 and 1.39 people with a pressure ulcer per 1000 population with the higher prevalence proportions found in postcodes with large numbers of nursing home beds. It would appear to be prudent to record the number of nursing home beds within community based populations where pressure ulcers (and potentially other wounds) are being recorded.

Keywords: Pressure ulcers, Prevalence, Assessment, care provision and treatment, Equipment, Infection