Abstract
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 407-424 |
| Number of pages | 18 |
| Journal | Journal of Advanced Nursing |
| Volume | 74 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Early online date | 28 Sep 2017 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Feb 2018 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- nursing
- pressure ulcer
- reliability
- risk assessment
- tissue viability
- usability
- validity
Cite this
}
Clinical evaluation of a new pressure ulcer risk assessment instrument, the Pressure Ulcer Risk Primary or Secondary Evaluation Tool (PURPOSE T). / Coleman, Susanne; Smith, Isabelle L.; McGinnis, Elizabeth; Keen, Justin; Muir, Delia; Wilson, Lyn; Stubbs, Nikki; Dealey, Carol; Brown, Sarah; Nelson, E. Andrea; Nixon, Jane.
In: Journal of Advanced Nursing, Vol. 74, No. 2, 02.2018, p. 407-424.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - Clinical evaluation of a new pressure ulcer risk assessment instrument, the Pressure Ulcer Risk Primary or Secondary Evaluation Tool (PURPOSE T)
AU - Coleman, Susanne
AU - Smith, Isabelle L.
AU - McGinnis, Elizabeth
AU - Keen, Justin
AU - Muir, Delia
AU - Wilson, Lyn
AU - Stubbs, Nikki
AU - Dealey, Carol
AU - Brown, Sarah
AU - Nelson, E. Andrea
AU - Nixon, Jane
N1 - Acceptance from webpage Author not at GCU at time of acceptance. ET 18/12/19
PY - 2018/2
Y1 - 2018/2
N2 - Aim; To test the psychometric properties and clinical usability of a new Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment Instrument including inter-rater and test–retest reliability, convergent validity and data completeness. Background; Methodological and practical limitations associated with traditional Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment Instruments, prompted a programme to work to develop a new instrument, as part of the National Institute for Health Research funded, Pressure UlceR Programme Of reSEarch (RP-PG-0407-10056). Design; Observational field test. Method; For this clinical evaluation 230 patients were purposefully sampled across four broad levels of pressure ulcer risk with representation from four secondary care and four community NHS Trusts in England. Blinded and simultaneous paired (ward/community nurse and expert nurse) PURPOSE-T assessments were undertaken. Follow-up retest was undertaken by the expert nurse. Field notes of PURPOSE-T use were collected. Data were collected October 2012–January 2013. Results; The clinical evaluation demonstrated “very good” (kappa) inter-rater and test–retest agreement for PURPOSE-T assessment decision overall. The percentage agreement for “problem/no problem” was over 75% for the main risk factors. Convergent validity demonstrated moderate to high associations with other measures of similar constructs. Conclusion; The PURPOSE-T evaluation facilitated the initial validation and clinical usability of the instrument and demonstrated that PURPOSE-T is suitable of use in clinical practice. Further study is needed to evaluate the impact of using the instrument on care processes and outcomes.
AB - Aim; To test the psychometric properties and clinical usability of a new Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment Instrument including inter-rater and test–retest reliability, convergent validity and data completeness. Background; Methodological and practical limitations associated with traditional Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment Instruments, prompted a programme to work to develop a new instrument, as part of the National Institute for Health Research funded, Pressure UlceR Programme Of reSEarch (RP-PG-0407-10056). Design; Observational field test. Method; For this clinical evaluation 230 patients were purposefully sampled across four broad levels of pressure ulcer risk with representation from four secondary care and four community NHS Trusts in England. Blinded and simultaneous paired (ward/community nurse and expert nurse) PURPOSE-T assessments were undertaken. Follow-up retest was undertaken by the expert nurse. Field notes of PURPOSE-T use were collected. Data were collected October 2012–January 2013. Results; The clinical evaluation demonstrated “very good” (kappa) inter-rater and test–retest agreement for PURPOSE-T assessment decision overall. The percentage agreement for “problem/no problem” was over 75% for the main risk factors. Convergent validity demonstrated moderate to high associations with other measures of similar constructs. Conclusion; The PURPOSE-T evaluation facilitated the initial validation and clinical usability of the instrument and demonstrated that PURPOSE-T is suitable of use in clinical practice. Further study is needed to evaluate the impact of using the instrument on care processes and outcomes.
KW - nursing
KW - pressure ulcer
KW - reliability
KW - risk assessment
KW - tissue viability
KW - usability
KW - validity
U2 - 10.1111/jan.13444
DO - 10.1111/jan.13444
M3 - Article
VL - 74
SP - 407
EP - 424
JO - Journal of Advanced Nursing
JF - Journal of Advanced Nursing
SN - 0309-2402
IS - 2
ER -