section name header

Evidence summaries

Risk Assessment Tools for the Prevention of Pressure Ulcers

Structured, systematic pressure ulcer risk assessment tools appear not to reduce the incidence of pressure ulcers. Level of evidence: "B"

The quality of evidence is downgraded by imprecise results.

Summary

A Cochrane review [Abstract] 1 included 2 studies with a total of 1401 subjects. One small, cluster randomised study found no statistical difference in pressure ulcer incidence in patients who were assessed by nurses using the Braden risk assessment tool (n=74) compared with patients assessed by nurses who had receiving training and then used unstructured risk assessment (n=76) (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.77) and those patients assessed by nurses using unstructured risk assessment alone (n=106) (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.77 to 2.68). The second study was a large high quality single blind randomised controlled study which compared the effect of risk assessment on pressure ulcer incidence using the Waterlow risk assessment tool (n=411), the Ramstadius risk screening tool (n=420) and no formal risk assessment (n=420). There was no statistical difference in pressure ulcer incidence between the three groups (Waterlow 7.5% (n=31); Ramstadius 5.4% (n=22); clinical judgement 6.8% (n=28) (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.81; Waterlow vs no formal risk assessment), (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.35; Ramstadius vs no formal risk assessment), (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.44; Waterlow vs Ramstadius).

Clinical comments

Note

Date of latest search:

    References

    • Moore ZE, Cowman S. Risk assessment tools for the prevention of pressure ulcers. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;(2):CD006471. [PubMed]

Primary/Secondary Keywords