Pressure Injury Prevention and Management: A Gap Analysis Using Key Stakeholder Engagement.
Joyce Pittman, Jo Ann Otts, Bettina Riley and 1 others
PMID 36108225WHAT IT FOUND
A hospital audit found that only 48% of pressure injury prevention practices met evidence standards.
Key gaps included lack of quality equipment, poor electronic decision support, and inadequate tools for staging injuries. Staff priorities differed, with managers favoring better data reporting.
Key findings
01The hospital's pressure injury prevention practices scored 48% against evidence-based standards, indicating significant gaps.
02Non–direct care staff rated feedback systems and outcome monitoring as significantly higher priorities than direct care staff did.
03The newly developed audit tool showed excellent content validity but only moderate agreement between expert users.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study was conducted at a single level I trauma academic hospital in Alabama, so the specific gaps identified may not reflect those in other settings. The audit tool showed only moderate reliability between expert raters, meaning two nurses might score the same practice differently without consensus discussion. The study took place during the COVID-19 pandemic, which limited the involvement of patients, caregivers, and direct care nurses due to staff reallocations and restrictions. The final gap analysis was performed by a small group of trained investigators and council members, not by a broad sample of frontline staff.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume the 48% score reflects a universal failure of nursing care or that the audit tool is ready for immediate independent use. The tool's moderate reliability means it currently requires consensus among raters to be accurate, and the results apply only to the specific academic hospital studied.