Risk Assessment Tool for Pressure Ulcer Development in Indian Surgical Wards
Indian Journal of Surgery, ISSN: 0973-9793, Vol: 77, Issue: 3, Page: 206-212
2015
- 8Citations
- 42Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations8
- Citation Indexes8
- CrossRef2
- Captures42
- Readers42
- 42
- Mentions1
- News Mentions1
- News1
Most Recent News
UTILITY OF THE WATERLOW SCALE IN ACUTE CARE SETTINGS: A LITERATURE REVIEW.
INTRODUCTION Pressure injuries (PIs) cause significant clinical problems in health-care facilities worldwide, and are responsible for considerable morbidity and mortality (Webster et al., 2010). Although
Article Description
The aims of this paper were to compare the predictive validity of three pressure ulcer (PU) risk scales—the Norton scale, the Braden scale, and the Waterlow scale—and to choose the most appropriate calculator for predicting PU risk in surgical wards of India. This is an observational prospective cohort study in a tertiary educational hospital in New Delhi among 100 surgical ward patients from April to July 2011. The main outcomes measured included sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PVP) and negative predictive value (PVN), and the area under the curve of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of the three PU risk assessment scales. Based on the cutoff points found most appropriate in this study, the sensitivity, specificity, PVP, and PVN were as follows: the Norton scale (cutoff, 16) had the values of 95.6, 93.5, 44.8, and 98.6, respectively; the Braden scale (cutoff, 17) had values of 100, 89.6, 42.5, and 100, respectively; and the Waterlow scale (cutoff, 11) had 91.3, 84.4, 38.8, and 97, respectively. According to the ROC curve, the Norton scale is the most appropriate tool. Factors such as physical condition, activity, mobility, body mass index (BMI), nutrition, friction, and shear are extremely significant in determining risk of PU development (p < 0.0001). The Norton scale is most effective in predicting PU risk in Indian surgical wards. BMI, mobility, activity, nutrition, friction, and shear are the most significant factors in Indian surgical ward settings with necessity for future comparison with established scales.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84938418679&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12262-012-0779-y; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26246703; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12262-012-0779-y; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12262-012-0779-y; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12262-012-0779-y
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know