Effect of non-response bias in pressure ulcer prevalence studies

Journal of Advanced Nursing

Volumn 55, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 230-236

  Lahmann, Nils ^a   Halfens, Ruud J G ^b   Dassen, Theo ^a  

^a HUMBOLDT UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Germany; Non response bias; Nursing; Point prevalence survey; Pressure ulcers; Prevalence

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; DECUBITUS; EPIDEMIOLOGY; FEMALE; GERMANY; HEALTH SURVEY; HOSPITAL; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTIVATION; NURSING HOME; PATIENT EDUCATION; PREVALENCE; REFUSAL TO PARTICIPATE;

AGED; BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); FEMALE; GERMANY; GOALS; HEALTH SURVEYS; HOSPITALS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTIVATION; NURSING HOMES; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; PRESSURE ULCER; PREVALENCE; REFUSAL TO PARTICIPATE;

EID: 33745876230     PISSN: 03092402     EISSN: 13652648     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03906.x     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Barczak C.A., Barnett R.I., Childs E.J. & Bosley L.M. (1997) Fourth national pressure ulcer prevalence survey. Advances in Wound Care 10(4), 18-26.
2. Berlowitz D.R., Ash A.S., Brandeis G.H., Brand H.K., Halpern J.L. & Moskowitz M.A. (1996) Rating long-term care facilities on pressure ulcer development: importance of case-mix adjustment. Annals of Internal Medicine 124(6), 557-563.
3. Berlowitz D.R., Anderson J.J., Ash A.S., Brandeis G.H., Brand H.K. & Moskowitz M.A. (1998) Reducing random variation in reported rates of pressure ulcer development. Medical Care 36(6), 818-825.
4. Bortz J. & Döring N. (2002) Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York.
5. Bours G.J., Halfens R.J., Lubbers M. & Haalboom J.R. (1999) The development of a national registration form to measure the prevalence of pressure ulcers in The Netherlands. Ostomy/Wound Management 45(11), 28-33, 36-38, 40.
6. Bours G.J., Halfens R.J., Berger M.P., Huijer Abu-Saad H. & Grol R.T. (2003) Development of a model for case-mix adjustment of pressure ulcer prevalence rates. Medical Care 41(1), 45-55.
7. Dealey C. (1997) Pressure ulcer prevention - the UK perspective. Dermatology Nursing 9(2), 108-113.
8. Frankel M. (1983) Sampling theory. In Handbook of Survey Research (Anderson A.B., ed.), Academic Press, Inc., New York, London, pp. 23-24.
9. Gruen R.L., Chang S. & MacLellan D.G. (1997) The point prevalence of wounds in a teaching hospital. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Surgery 67(10), 686-688.
10. Haalboom J.R. (2000) A new century without pressure ulcers? British Journal of Nursing 9(6 Suppl.), S4-S6.
11. Halfens R.J. (2000) Risk assessment scales for pressure ulcers: a theoretical, methodological, and clinical perspective. Ostomy/Wound Management 46(8), 36-40, 42-44.
12. Healey F. (1996) Classification of pressure sores: 2. British Journal of Nursing 5(9), 567-568, 570, 572-574.
13. Hoeymans N., Feskens E.J., Van Den Bos G.A. & Kromhout D. (1998) Non-response bias in a study of cardiovascular diseases, functional status and self-rated health among elderly men. Age and Ageing 27(1), 35-40.
14. Hopkins B., Hanlon M., Yauk S., Sykes S., Rose T. & Cleary A. (2000) Reducing nosocomial pressure ulcers in an acute care facility. Journal Nursing Care Quality 14(3), 28-36.
15. Jacksich B.B. (1997) Pressure ulcer prevalence and prevention of nosocomial development: one hospital's experience. Ostomy/Wound Management 43(3), 32-36, 38-40.
16. Korkeila K., Suominen S., Ahvenainen J., Ojanlatva A., Rautava P., Helenius H. & Koskenvuo M. (2001) Non-response and related factors in a nation-wide health survey. European Journal of Epidemiology 17(11), 991-999.
17. Lahaut V.M., Jansen H.A., van de Mheen D. & Garretsen H.F. (2002) Non-response bias in a sample survey on alcohol consumption. Alcohol and Alcoholism 37(3), 256-260.
18. Lake N.O. (1999) Measuring incidence and prevalence of pressure ulcers for intergroup comparison. Advances in Wound Care 12(1), 31-34.
19. Leffmann C.J., Leutenegger M. & Schroeder Hartwig K. (1998) Qualitätssicherung in der Pflege, Das Hamburger Dekubitusprojekt [Quality assurance in nursing care, The Hamburg pressure ulcer projekt]. Die Schwester/Der Pfleger 37(5), 412-422.
20. Meehan M. (1994) National pressure ulcer prevalence survey. Advances in Wound Care 7(3), 27-30, 34, 36-38.
21. NPUAP (2003) National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, Frequently Asked Questions: What is Prevalence? Retrieved from http://www.npuap.org/FAQP&I. htm on 1 December 2003.
22. Pearson A., Francis K., Hodgkinson B. & Curry G. (2000) Prevalence and treatment of pressure ulcers in northern New South Wales. The Australian Journal of Rural Health 8(2), 103-110.
23. Perneger T.V., Heliot C., Rae A.C., Borst F. & Gaspoz J.M. (1998) Hospital-acquired pressure ulcers: risk factors and use of preventive devices. Archives of Internal Medicine 158(17), 1940-1945.
24. Rupp I., Triemstra M., Boshuizen H.C., Jacobi C.E., Dinant H.J. & van den Bos G.A. (2002) Selection bias due to non-response in a health survey among patients with rheumatoid arthritis. European Journal of Public Health 12(2), 131-135.
25. Scheuch E.K. (1974) Auswahlverfahren in der Sozialforschung. In Handbuch der empirischen Sozialforschung, Vol. 3, König R., Stuttgart, pp. 59-60.
26. Schnell R. (1997) Nonresponse in Bevölkerungsumfragen. Leske & Budrich, Opladen.
27. Schumacher R. & Eveslage K. (1999) Wound care. Pressure gauge. Nursing Times 95(27), 71.
28. Scott F. & Newens A. (1999) Hospital monitoring of pressure ulcers in the UK. Journal of Wound Care 8(5), 221-224.
29. Solberg L.I., Beth Pane M., Brown R., Underbakke G. & McBride P.E. (2002) Nonresponse bias: does it affect measurement of clinician behavior? Medical Care 40(4), 347-352.
30. Steingass S., Klein B., Hube G., Pavel K., Walter K. & Weiss V. (2002) Neue Wege der Qualitätssicherung - Modellprojekt Dekubituserfassung im Ostalbkreis [New avenues to quality assurance - a model project for recording bedsore incidence]. Gesundheitswesen 64(11), 585-591.
31. Tsokos M., Heinemann A. & Puschel K. (2000) Pressure sores: epidemiology, medico-legal implications and forensic argumentation concerning causality. International Journal of Legal Medicine 113(5), 283-287.