Development of a model for case-mix adjustment of pressure ulcer prevalence rates

Medical Care

Volumn 41, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 45-55

  Bours, Gerrie J J W ^a   Halfens, Ruud J G ^a   Berger, Martijn P F ^a   Abu Saad, Huda Huijer ^a   Grol, Richard T P M ^b  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Acute care hospitals; Case mix adjustment; Pressure ulcers; Risk adjustment

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE; AGED; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DECUBITUS; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; LENGTH OF STAY; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; PREVALENCE; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; STATISTICAL MODEL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; HUMANS; LENGTH OF STAY; LOGISTIC MODELS; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; PRESSURE ULCER; PREVALENCE; QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE; RISK ADJUSTMENT; RISK FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 0037264557     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00005650-200301000-00008     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Buss IC, Halfens RJG, Huijer Abu-Saad H, et al. Evidence-based nursing practice: both state of the art in general and specific to pressure sores. J Prof Nurs 1999;15:73-83.
2. Mukamel DB. Risk-adjusted outcome measures and quality of care in nursing homes. Med Care 1997;35:367-385.
3. Bankert K, Daughtridge S, Meehan M, et al. The application of collaborative benchmarking to the prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers. Adv Wound Care 1996;9:21-29.
4. Daley J, Shwartz M. Developing risk-adjustment methods. In: lezoni LI, eds. Risk adjustment for measuring health care outcomes. Chicago, IL: Health Administration Press; 1997:279-329.
5. Berlowitz DR, Ash AS, Brandeis GH, et ai. Rating long-term care facilities on pressure ulcer development: importance of case-mix adjustment. Ann Intern Med 1996;124:557-563.
6. Arling G, Karon SL, Sainfort F, et al. Risk adjustment of nursing home quality indicators. Gerontologist 1997;37:757-766.
7. Porell F, Caro FG. Facility-level outcome performance measures for nursing homes. Gerontologist 1998;38:665-683.
8. Stuurgroep Decubitus. Decubitus kan beter voorkomen worden: actieplan: preventie van decubitus. [Pressure ulcers may be preventable in a better way. Strategy: prevention of pressure ulcers] Woerden: The Netherlands: Nationaal Instituut voor Gezondheidsbev-ordering en Ziektepreventie; 1997.
9. Bours GJJW, Halfens RJG, Lubbers M, et al. The development of a national registration form to measure the prevalence of pressure ulcers in the Netherlands. Ostomy Wound Manage 1999;45:28-40.
10. DefloorT. The risk of pressure sores: a conceptual scheme. J Clinic Nurs 1999;8:206-216.
11. Braden BJ, Bergstrom N. A conceptual schema for the study of the aetiology of pressure sores. Rehab Nurs 1987;12:8-12.
12. Gunning-Schepers LJ, Wendte JF, Welleman E. Decubitus in Nederland: een onderzoek naar de mogelijkheden om het voorkomen van decubitus in Nederland te meten. [Pressureu ulcers in the Netherlands: study of the possibilities to measure the prevalence of pressure ulcers]. Amsterdam: Instituut voor Sociale Geneeskunde, Universiteit van Amsterdam; 1993.
13. National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel. Cuddigan J, Ayello EA, Sussman C, eds. Pressure ulcers in America: prevalence, incidence, and implications for the future. Reston, VA: NPUAP, 2001.
14. Bergstrom N, Braden BJ, Laguzza A, et al. The Braden scale for predicting pressure sore risk. Nurs Res 1987;36:205-210.
15. Braden BJ, Bergstrom N. Predictive validity of the Braden scale for pressure sore risk in a nursing home. Res Nurs Health 1994;17:459-470.
16. Halfens RJG, Van Achterberg T, Bal RM. Validity and reliability of the Braden scale and the influence of other risk factors: a multi-centre prospective. Int J Nurs Stud 2000;37:313-319.
17. European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel. A policy statement on the prevention of pressure ulcers from the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel [practice guideline]. Br J Nurs 1998;7:888-890.
18. Agency for Health Care Policy and Research. Treatment of pressure ulcers. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services. Public Health Service; 1994.
19. Bours GJJW, De Laat E, Halfens RJG, et al. Prevalence, risk factors and prevention of pressure ulcers in Dutch intensive care units: results of a cross-sectional survey. Intens Care Med 2001;27:1599-1605.
20. Bours GJJW, Halfens RJG, Huijer Abu-Saad H, et al. Prevalence, prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers: descriptive study in 89 institutions in the Netherlands. Res Nurs Health 2002;25:99-110.
21. Zollo MB, Gostisha ML, Berens RJ, et al. Altered skin integrity in children admitted to a paediatric intensive care unit. J Nurs Care Qual 1996;11:62-67.
22. Pallija G, Mondozzi M, Webb AA. Skin care of the pediatric patient. J Ped Nurs 1999;14:80-87.
23. Bergstrom N, Braden B, Kemp M, et al. Multi-site study of incidence of pressure ulcers and the relationship between risk level, demographic characteristics, diagnoses, and prescription of preventive interventions. J Am Geriatr Soc 1996;44:22-30.
24. Halfens RJG, Bours GJJW, Van Ast W. The relevance of the diagnosis pressure ulcer stage 1: an empirical study regarding the course of stage 1 in a general hospital and nursing home population. J Clin Nurs 2001;10:748-757.
25. Hunt J. Application of a pressure area risk calculator in an intensive care unit. Intens Crit Care Nurs 1993;9:226-231.
26. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons; 1989.
27. Ash AS, Shwartz M. Evaluating the performance of risk-adjustment methods: dichotomous outcomes. In: Iezoni LI, ed. Risk adjustment for measuring health care outcomes. Chicago, IL: Health Administration Press; 1997:427-469.
28. Centraal Begeleidingsorgaan voor de Inter-collegiale Toetsing. Herziening consensus decubitus. [Revision pressure sore consensus]. Utrecht: Centraal Begeleidingsorgaan voor de Intercollegiale Toetsing; 1992.
29. Iezoni LI. Risk adjustment for measuring healthcare outcomes. Chicago, IL: Health Administration Press; 1997.
30. Mukamel DB, Brower CA. The influence of risk adjustment methods on conclusions about quality of care in nursing homes based on outcome measures. Gerontologist 1998;38:695-703.
31. Rudman D, Mattson DE, Alverno LA, et al. Comparison of clinical indicators in two nursing homes. J Am Geriatr Soc 1993;41:1317-1325.