Reliability and validity of pressure ulcer diagnosis and grading: An image-based survey

International Journal of Nursing Studies

Volumn 44, Issue 8, 2007, Pages 1316-1323

  Stausberg, Jürgen ^a   Lehmann, Nils ^a   Kröger, Knut ^a   Maier, Irene ^a   Niebel, Wolfgang ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ESSEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Decubitus ulcer; Diagnosis; Hospital; Incidence; Prevalence; Reliability; Validity

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BUTTOCK; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECUBITUS; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; FOOT; HUMAN; NURSING; PATHOLOGY; PATIENT CARE; PHOTOGRAPHY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REPRODUCIBILITY; SKIN DISEASE;

BUTTOCKS; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; FOOT; HUMANS; PATIENT CARE TEAM; PHOTOGRAPHY; PRESSURE ULCER; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SKIN DISEASES;

EID: 34548850056     PISSN: 00207489     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2006.06.006     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. AHRQ Quality Indicators-Guide to Patient Safety Indicators. Version 2.1, Revision 3, (January 17, 2005). AHRQ Pub.03-R203 (2005), Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD
2. Barnhart H.X., and Williamson J.H. Weighted least-squares approach for comparing correlated kappa. Biometrics 58 (2002) 1012-1019
3. Berlowitz D.R. Striving for six sigma in pressure ulcer care. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 51 (2003) 1320-1321
4. Bethell E. Incidence and prevalence data: can we ensure greater accuracy. Journal of Wound Care 11 (2002) 285-288
5. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Education and Psychology Measurement 20 (1960) 37-46
6. Defloor T., and Schoonhoven L. Inter-rater reliability of the EPUAP pressure ulcer classification system using photographs. Journal of Clinical Nursing 13 (2004) 952-959
7. Deutsches Institut für Medizinische Dokumentation und Information, Hrsg., 2004. ICD-10-GM Version 2005. Internationale statistische Klassifikation der Krankheiten und verwandter Gesundheitsprobleme, 10. Revision. German Modification. Band I: Systematisches Verzeichnis. Kohlhammer, Stuttgart.
8. Donner A., Shoukri M.M., Klar N., and Bartfay E. Testing the equality of two dependent Kappa statistics. Statistics in Medicine 19 (2000) 373-387
9. Halfens R.J.G., Bours G.J.J.W., and van Ast W. Relevance of the diagnosis 'stage 1 pressure ulcer': an empirical study of the clinical course of stage 1 ulcers in acute care and long-term care hospital populations. Journal of Clinical Nursing 10 (2001) 748-757
10. Healey F. The reliability and utility of pressure sore grading scales. Journal of Tissue Viability 5 (1995) 111-114
11. Landis J.R., and Koch G.G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33 (1977) 159-174
12. National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel. In: Cuddigan J., Ayello E.A., and Sussmann C. (Eds). Pressure Ulcer in America: Prevalence, Incidence, and Implications for the Future (2001), NPUAP, Reston, VA
13. Nixon J., Thorpe H., Barrow H., Philips A., Nelson E.A., Mason S.A., and Cullum N. Reliability of pressure ulcer classification and diagnosis. Journal of Advanced Nursing 50 (2005) 613-623
14. Pedley G.E. Comparison of pressure ulcer grading scales: a study of clinical utility and inter-rater reliability. International Journal of Nursing Studies 41 (2004) 129-140
15. Russel L.J., and Reynolds T.M. How accurate are pressure ulcer grades? An image-based survey of nurse performance. Journal of Tissue Viability 11 (2001) 67-75
16. Stausberg J., Kröger K., Maier I., Schneider H., Niebel W., and for the interdisciplinary decubitus project. Pressure ulcers in secondary care: incidence, prevalence and relevance. Advances in Skin & Wound Care 18 (2005) 140-145