Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

Correction to: Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake

Indicateurs de performance en logistique humanitaire : application au département de la logistique opérationnelle de MSF Supply

La mesure de la performance au sein des organisations est aujourd'hui un sujet d'importance, faisant l'objet d'une large littérature, tant pour le secteur privé que pour le secteur humanitaire. Être capable de mesurer "la bonne chose au bon moment" afin d'être en mesure de prendre les décisions au moment opportun est devenu indispensable pour les organisations (Gunasekaran & Kobu, 2007). Ce mémoire propose une liste d'indicateurs de performance pour le département de la logistique opérationnelle de MSF Supply. Le principal objectif de ce tableau de bord reprenant des indicateurs de performance clés est de fournir une vue globale du département et de centraliser les informations disponibles en un ensemble cohérent d'indicateurs. Il sert également à fournir un suivi de l'activité au jour le jour, offre la possibilité de comparer les niveaux d'activité et la productivité au fil du temps, fournit une vision de l'impact de certaines urgences ou de potentiels projets d'amélioration sur l'activité du département ainsi qu'une vue sur les zones de force et de faiblesse au sein du département et les causes de celles-ci. Les avantages des indicateurs de performance et les raisons qui poussent les organisations à les utiliser sont multiples. Ils peuvent notamment contribuer à une augmentation de la transparence sur l'activité de l'organisation et fournir des éléments pour établir une comparaison avec d'autres organisations ou d'autres parties de l'organisation (benchmarking). Grâce à une revue de littérature sur la mesure de performance en supply chain et en logistique humanitaire, nous avons dans un premier temps généré une liste d'indicateurs proposés dans des modèles théoriques. Nous nous sommes principalement intéressés à des modèles définissant les indicateurs de performance en fonction des processus de l'organisation, et non sur des modèles se basant sur la stratégie de l'organisation. La raison de ce choix est la meilleure adéquation de ce type d'indicateurs avec les objectifs opérationnels du tableau de bord à mettre en place. Suite à cette revue de littérature, nous avons choisi d'utiliser le modèle SCOR comme principale base pour la suite de notre travail. Notre choix s'est porté sur le modèle SCOR étant donné qu'il offre des indicateurs de performance couvrant l'entièreté de la supply chain, qu'il s'agit d'un modèle reconnu mondialement et largement utilisé, qu'il comprend des processus standards auxquels sont rattachés les indicateurs de performance, qu'il offre une approche se basant sur les processus de l'organisation pour définir les indicateurs de performance et qu'il permet de prendre en compte plusieurs aspects dans la mesure de la performance (fiabilité, réactivité, agilité, coûts et actifs liés à la supply chain). Nous avons ensuite analysé les processus en place au sein du département de la logistique opérationnelle de MSF Supply avec l'aide du modèle SCOR et élaboré une liste plus restreinte d'indicateurs de performance pouvant être liés à ces processus. Cette seconde liste a servi de base à la génération de la liste finale proposée. Les indicateurs ayant été écartés et les liens existants entre les indicateurs retenus et les modèles théoriques ont également été exposés.Master [120] en Ingénieur de gestion, Université catholique de Louvain, 201

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

Correction to: Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study (Intensive Care Medicine, (2021), 47, 2, (160-169), 10.1007/s00134-020-06234-9)

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake. The members of the ESICM Trials Group Collaborators were not shown in the article but only in the ESM. The full list of collaborators is shown below. The original article has been corrected