Dataset Information

Efficacy of pressure ulcer prevention interventions in adult intensive care units: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Pressure ulcers (PUs) are associated with substantial health burden. Patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are at high risk for developing PU. In the absence of large randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compare commonly known interventions for preventing PU in ICUs, uncertainty remains around the best practice strategy for PU management in adult ICUs. This study, therefore, aims to identify the most effective interventions and combinations of interventions that prevent PU in adult ICU using systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA).

Methods and analysis

We will search for all published and unpublished RCTs evaluating interventions to prevent PU compared with other PU prevention measures or with usual care in adult ICU. The primary outcomes are the incidence of PUs and PU severity in critically ill patients in ICU. The secondary outcomes include number of PUs per patient and intervention-related harms caused by the prevention intervention or intervention-related harms. All data extraction will be performed by at least two independent reviewers on the basis of a priori developed extraction form. We will evaluate the risk of bias of the included RCTs in accordance with the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool, and assess the quality of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation. A standard pairwise meta-analysis and a Bayesian NMA will be conducted to compare the efficacy of different PU prevention interventions. A surface under the cumulative ranking curve will be used to rank the probabilities of each prevention intervention for various outcomes.

Ethics and dissemination

This study will not require the ethics approval as it is a review based on published studies. The findings of this study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication. We anticipate that the results of the study will provide the evidence to inform clinicians and guideline developers on determining the best interventions for the prevention of PU in ICU patients.

Prospero registration number

CRD42018085562.

SUBMITTER: Du Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6500189 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy of pressure ulcer prevention interventions in adult intensive care units: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Du Yixiu Y Wu Fangqin F Lu Sai S Zheng Wei W Wang Huiying H Chen Ruming R Lu Xiaoying X Zhang Yu Y

BMJ open 20190409 4

<h4>Introduction</h4>Pressure ulcers (PUs) are associated with substantial health burden. Patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are at high risk for developing PU. In the absence of large randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compare commonly known interventions for preventing PU in ICUs, uncertainty remains around the best practice strategy for PU management in adult ICUs. This study, therefore, aims to identify the most effective interventions and combinations of interventions that preven ...[more]

PMID: 30967408

Similar Datasets

Project description:Pressure ulcers are a prevalent and global issue and support surfaces are widely used for preventing ulceration. However, the diversity of available support surfaces and the lack of direct comparisons in RCTs make decision-making difficult.To determine, using network meta-analysis, the relative effects of different support surfaces in reducing pressure ulcer incidence and comfort and to rank these support surfaces in order of their effectiveness.We conducted a systematic review, using a literature search up to November 2016, to identify randomised trials comparing support surfaces for pressure ulcer prevention. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction. We grouped the support surfaces according to their characteristics and formed evidence networks using these groups. We used network meta-analysis to estimate the relative effects and effectiveness ranking of the groups for the outcomes of pressure ulcer incidence and participant comfort. GRADE was used to assess the certainty of evidence.We included 65 studies in the review. The network for assessing pressure ulcer incidence comprised evidence of low or very low certainty for most network contrasts. There was moderate-certainty evidence that powered active air surfaces and powered hybrid air surfaces probably reduce pressure ulcer incidence compared with standard hospital surfaces (risk ratios (RR) 0.42, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.29 to 0.63; 0.22, 0.07 to 0.66, respectively). The network for comfort suggested that powered active air-surfaces are probably slightly less comfortable than standard hospital mattresses (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.94; moderate-certainty evidence).This is the first network meta-analysis of the effects of support surfaces for pressure ulcer prevention. Powered active air-surfaces probably reduce pressure ulcer incidence, but are probably less comfortable than standard hospital surfaces. Most prevention evidence was of low or very low certainty, and more research is required to reduce these uncertainties.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Despite sparse pediatric data on effectiveness, the majority of critically ill children receive medications to prevent gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. Stress ulcer prophylaxis may have unintended consequences-increasing the risk of nosocomial infections-which may be more serious and common than the bleeding which these drugs are prescribed to prevent. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in pediatric critical care are exceptionally challenging to complete, thus a rigorous pilot RCT is crucial. The objective of this pilot RCT is to assess the feasibility of a large multicentre RCT of stress ulcer prophylaxis with pantoprazole to prevent upper GI bleeding vs. placebo. METHODS:A multi-centre blinded pilot RCT of 120 children in six Canadian PICUs. Children expected to require mechanical ventilation for more than 48 h will be randomized to receive intravenous pantoprazole 1 mg/kg or identical placebo once daily until they no longer need mechanical ventilation. We have four feasibility outcomes and will consider the trial successful if we achieve:Effective screening: If >80% of eligible patients are approached for consent.Timely enrollment: if >80% of participants receive their first dose of the assigned study drug within 1 day of becoming eligible.Participant accrual: If the average monthly enrolment is two or more participants per centre per month.Protocol adherence: if >90% of doses are administered according to the protocol. DISCUSSION:There are many uncertainties about the risks and benefits of stress ulcer prophylaxis. In an era of widespread use-where clinicians prescribe prophylaxis to the more severely ill-a large, rigorous RCT is required. A trial to determine if a strategy of withholding stress ulcer prophylaxis is not inferior to a strategy of routine stress ulcer prophylaxis will be challenging. A carefully designed and implemented pilot trial is essential. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT02929563 (Registered October 3, 2016).

Project description:IntroductionPressure ulcers are serious and potentially life-threatening problems across all age groups and across all medical specialties and care settings. The hospitalised elderly population is the most common group to develop pressure ulcers. This study aims to systematically review studies implementing pressure ulcer prevention strategies recommended in the Pressure Ulcer Prevention Practice Guidelines for the prevention of pressure ulcers among hospitalised elderly patients globally.Methods and analysisA systematic review of all studies that have assessed the use of pressure ulcer prevention strategies in hospital settings among hospitalised elderly patients shall be conducted. A comprehensive search of all published articles in Medline Ovid, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, Scopus and Web of Science will be done using terms such as pressure ulcers, prevention strategies, elderly patients and hospital. Studies will be screened for eligibility through title, abstract and full text by two independent reviewers. Study quality and risk of bias will be assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute for Meta-Analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument. If sufficient data are available, a meta-analysis will be conducted to synthesise the effect size reported as OR with 95% CIs using both fixed and random effect models. I2 statistics and visual inspection of the forest plots will be used to assess heterogeneity and identify the potential sources of heterogeneity. Publication bias will be assessed by visual inspections of funnel plots and Egger's test.Ethics and disseminationNo formal ethical approval or consent is required as no primary data will be collected. We aim to publish the research findings in a peer-reviewed scientific journal to promote knowledge transfer, as well as in conferences, seminars, congresses or symposia in a traditional manner.Prospero registration numberCRD42019129088.

Project description:Because the demand for government-subsidized nursing homes in Hong Kong outstrips the supply, the number of for-profit private nursing homes has been increasing rapidly. However, the standard of care in such homes is always criticized. Pressure ulcers are a major long-term care issue that is closely associated with the quality of care delivered in nursing home settings. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a pressure ulcer prevention programme for residents in private for-profit nursing homes.This is a two-arm cluster randomized controlled trial with an estimated sample size of 1088 residents and 74 care staff from eight for-profit private nursing homes. Eligible nursing homes will be those classified as category A2 homes in the Enhanced Bought Place Scheme (EBPS), having a capacity of around 130-150 beds, and no structured PU prevention protocol and/or programmes in place. Care staff will be health workers, personal care workers, and nurses who are front-line staff providing direct care to residents. Eight nursing homes will be randomly assigned to either an experimental or control group. The experimental group will be provided with an intensive training programme and will be involved in the implementation of a 16-week pressure ulcer prevention protocol, while the control group will deliver the usual pressure ulcer prevention care. The study outcomes are the pressure ulcer prevention knowledge and skills of the care staff and the prevalence and incidence of pressure ulcers. Data on the knowledge and skills of care staff, and prevalence of pressure ulcer will be collected at the base line, and then at the 8(th) week and at completion of the implementation of the protocol. The assessment of the incidence of pressures will start from before the commencement of the intensive training course to the end of the implementation of the protocol.In view of the negative impact of pressure ulcers, it is important to have an effective and evidence-based pressure ulcer prevention programme to improve preventive care in private for-profit nursing homes. The programme will potentially improve the knowledge and skills of care staff on the prevention of pressure ulcers and also lead to a reduction in the development of pressure ulcers in nursing homes.The Current Controlled Trial is NCT02270385, 18 October 2014.

Project description:Randomized trials of complex, non-pharmacologic interventions implemented in home and community settings, such as the University of Southern California (USC)-Rancho Los Amigos National Rehabilitation Center (RLANRC) Pressure Ulcer Prevention Study (PUPS), present unique challenges with respect to (1) participant recruitment and retention, (2) intervention delivery and fidelity, (3) randomization and assessment, and (4) potential inadvertent treatment effects.We describe the methods employed to address the challenges confronted in implementing PUPS. In this randomized controlled trial, we are assessing the efficacy of a complex, preventive intervention in reducing the incidence of, and costs associated with, the development of medically serious pressure ulcers in people with spinal cord injury.Individuals with spinal cord injury recruited from RLANRC were assigned to either a 12-month preventive intervention group or a standard care control group. The primary outcome is the incidence of serious pressure ulcers with secondary endpoints including ulcer-related surgeries, medical treatment costs, and quality of life. These outcomes are assessed at 12 and 24 months after randomization. Additionally, we are studying the mediating mechanisms that account for intervention outcomes.PUPS has been successfully implemented, including recruitment of the target sample size of 170 participants, assurance of the integrity of intervention protocol delivery with an average 90% treatment adherence rate, and enactment of the assessment plan. However, implementation has been replete with challenges. To meet recruitment goals, we instituted a five-pronged approach customized for an underserved, ethnically diverse population. In intervention delivery, we increased staff time to overcome economic and cultural barriers to retention and adherence. To ensure treatment fidelity and replicability, we monitored intervention protocol delivery in accordance with a rigorous plan. Finally, we have overcome unanticipated assessment and design concerns related to (1) determining pressure ulcer incidence/severity, (2) randomization imbalance, and (3) inadvertent potential control group contamination.We have addressed the most daunting challenges encountered in the recruitment, assessment, and intervention phases of PUPS. Some challenges and solutions may not apply to trials conducted in other settings.Overcoming challenges has required a multifaceted approach incorporating individualization, flexibility, and persistence, as well as the ability to implement needed mid-course corrections.

Project description:BackgroundTelemedicine has been deployed to address issues in intensive care delivery, as well as to improve outcome and quality of care. Implementation of this technology has been characterized by high variability. Tele-intensive care unit (ICU) interventions involve the combination of multiple technological and organizational components, as well as interconnections of key stakeholders inside the hospital organization. The extensive literature on the benefits of tele-ICUs has been characterized as heterogeneous. On one hand, positive clinical and economical outcomes have been shown in multiple studies. On the other hand, no tangible benefits could be detected in several cases. This could be due to the diverse forms of organizations and the fact that tele-ICU interventions are complex to evaluate. The implementation context of tele-ICUs has been shown to play an important role in the success of the technology. The benefits derived from tele-ICUs depend on the organization where it is deployed and how the telemedicine systems are applied. There is therefore value in analyzing the benefits of tele-ICUs in relation to the characteristics of the organization where it is deployed. To date, research on the topic has not provided a comprehensive overview of literature taking both the technology setup and implementation context into account.ObjectiveWe present a protocol for a scoping review of the literature on telemedicine in the ICU and its benefits in intensive care. The purpose of this review is to map out evidence about telemedicine in critical care in light of the implementation context. This review could represent a valuable contribution to support the development of tele-ICU technologies and offer perspectives on possible configurations, based on the implementation context and use case.MethodsWe have followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist and the recommendations of the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews. The scoping review and subsequent systematic review will be completed by spring 2021.ResultsThe preliminary search has been conducted. After removing all duplicates, we found 2530 results. The review can now be advanced to the next steps of the methodology, including literature database queries with appropriate keywords, retrieval of the results in a reference management tool, and screening of titles and abstracts.ConclusionsThe results of the search indicate that there is sufficient literature to complete the scoping review. Upon completion, the scoping review will provide a map of existing evidence on tele-ICU systems given the implementation context. Findings of this research could be used by researchers, clinicians, and implementation teams as they determine the appropriate setup of new or existing tele-ICU systems. The need for future research contributions and systematic reviews will be identified.International registered report identifier (irrid)DERR1-10.2196/19695.

Dataset Information

Efficacy of pressure ulcer prevention interventions in adult intensive care units: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Introduction

Methods and analysis

Ethics and dissemination

Prospero registration number

Publications

Efficacy of pressure ulcer prevention interventions in adult intensive care units: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets