The Psychometric Properties of the Braden Scale to Assess Pressure Injury Risk in Acute Care: A Systematic Review.
Adam Burston, Jacob Butterworth, Aldiana Mehicic and 1 others
PMID 40524088WHAT IT FOUND
The Braden Scale used by nurses to flag pressure injury risk in acute hospitals is consistent between assessors, but recommended cut-off scores and accuracy vary widely.
Use it with clinical judgement, not as the sole guide.
Key findings
01The review found the Braden Scale is generally reliable for assessing pressure injury risk in acute care, but its validity remains uncertain.
02Reported Braden cut-off scores ranged from 10 to 20, sensitivity from 16.2 to 100%, specificity from 0 to 100%, positive predictive value from 1.2 to 100%, and negative predictive value from 0 to 100%.
03Expert and ward nurses' mean agreement on five subjective Braden descriptors ranged from 33.3% to 50%, and reliability studies did not report measurement error.
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 review applies only to adult acute care outside ICU, so it does not tell nurses how the scale performs in ICU, long-term care or community settings. Only English-language studies were included, so relevant evidence in other languages may be missing. The included studies were very different in design, population and analysis, so the review could not combine their results statistically. Risk of bias ratings were recorded but poor-quality studies were still included, and some studies did not clearly report sample size. Reliability studies did not report measurement error, so confidence in detecting clinically important changes is limited. Several Braden items are subjective, and nurse agreement on those items varied. Most validity evidence was about predicting pressure injury occurrence, not about whether the scale identifies risk accurately enough to guide prevention.
Declared interests
The review received no funding, and the authors declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not treat good reliability as proof that the Braden Scale accurately identifies patients who will develop pressure injury. The review found validity varied widely, and recommended cut-off scores were inconsistent across studies.