| 1. |
- Lechner, A., et al.
(författare)
-
Outcomes for Pressure Ulcer Trials (OUTPUTs) project : review and classification of outcomes reported in pressure ulcer prevention research
- 2021
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Dermatology. - : Blackwell Science Ltd.. - 0007-0963 .- 1365-2133. ; 184:4, s. 617-626
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: In order to overcome inconsistencies in the reporting of outcomes in clinical trials, core outcome sets (COS) have been developed in many clinical areas and the awareness of this concept is growing steadily. The Outcomes for Pressure Ulcer Trials (OUTPUTs) project aims to improve the quality of evidence on pressure ulcer prevention trials by developing a COS.OBJECTIVES: As an initial step in the COS process we aimed to identify and classify outcomes as well as concepts that represent potential outcomes for future trials that have been reported in pressure ulcer prevention research.METHODS: A review was conducted in twelve major databases covering the literature indexed until 2016. Outcomes and relevant concepts reported in primary studies and/or reviews on pressure ulcer prevention in adult patients were extracted as presented in the articles, and afterwards inductively grouped into outcome domains. The domains were then categorized according to the outcome domain taxonomy recently proposed by the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Group.RESULTS: 332 studies were included and 68 outcome domains were identified, covering multiple aspects of pressure ulcer prevention. Pressure ulcer occurrence was reported in 71% of all included studies representing the most frequent outcome, followed by costs (22% of all studies), and acceptability of intervention and comfort (18% of all studies).CONCLUSION: A plethora of different outcomes is applied in pressure ulcer prevention research and substantial variations in definitions and reporting of similar outcomes were observed. A COS for pressure ulcer prevention trials is needed to overcome the non-comparability of outcomes.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Van Tiggelen, H., et al.
(författare)
-
Standardising the classification of skin tears : validity and reliability testing of the International Skin Tear Advisory Panel (ISTAP) Classification System in 44 countries
- 2020
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Dermatology. - : Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Inc.. - 0007-0963 .- 1365-2133. ; 183:1, s. 146-154
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Skin tears are acute wounds that are frequently misdiagnosed and underreported. A standardised and globally adopted skin tear classification system with supporting evidence for diagnostic validity and reliability is required to allow assessment and reporting in a consistent way.OBJECTIVES: To measure the validity and reliability of the International Skin Tear Advisory Panel (ISTAP) Classification System internationally.METHODS: A multi-country study was set up to validate the content of the ISTAP Classification System through expert consultation in a two-round Delphi procedure involving 17 experts from 11 countries. An online survey including 24 skin tear photographs was conducted in a convenience sample of 1601 healthcare professionals from 44 countries to measure diagnostic accuracy, agreement, inter-rater reliability, and intra-rater reliability of the instrument.RESULTS: A definition for the concept of a "skin flap" in the area of skin tears was developed and added to the initial ISTAP Classification System consisting of three skin tear types. The overall agreement with the reference standard was 0.79 (95% CI 0.79-0.80) and sensitivity ranged from 0.74 (95% CI 0.73-0.75) to 0.88 (95% CI 0.87-0.88). The inter-rater reliability was 0.57 (95% CI 0.57-0.57). The Cohen's Kappa measuring intra-rater reliability was 0.74 (95% CI 0.73-0.75).CONCLUSIONS: The ISTAP Classification System is supported by evidence for validity and reliability. The ISTAP Classification System should be used for a systematic assessment and reporting of skin tears in clinical practice and research globally.
|
|
