title: The National Pressure Ulcer Long-Term Care Study: outcomes of pressure ulcer treatments in long-term care.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To identify resident, wound, and treatment characteristics associated with pressure ulcer (PrU) healing in long-term care residents.
  
  
  METHODS
  Retrospective cohort study with convenience sampling.
  
  
  METHODS
  Ninety-five long-term care facilities participating in the National Pressure Ulcer Long-Term Care Study throughout the United States.
  
  
  METHODS
  Eight hundred eighty-two residents, aged 18 and older, with length of stay of 14 days or longer, who had at least one Stage II to IV PrU.
  
  
  METHODS
  Data collected for each resident over a 12-week period included resident characteristics, treatment characteristics, and change in PrU area. Data were obtained from medical records, Minimum Data Set, and other records.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Two multiple regression models, one for each stage grouping (Stage II, Stage III and IV), were completed. The area of Stage II PrU was reduced more with moist (F=21.91, P<.001) than with dry (F=13.41, P<.001) dressings. PrUs cleaned with saline or soap showed less decrease in area (F=12.34, P<.001) than PrUs cleaned with other cleansers such as antiseptic, antibiotic, or commercial cleansers. Change in area of Stage III and IV PrUs was related to sufficient enteral feeding (F=5.23, P=.02), enteral feeding without higher acuity levels (F=3.94, P=.048), size of PrU (very large (F=120.89, P=.001) and large (F=27.82, P=.001)), and type of dressing (moist (F=14.70, P<.001) and dry (F=5.88, P=.02)). Stage III and IV PrUs increased in area when debrided (F=5.97, P=.02). The overall models were significant (Stage III and IV, F=20.30, coefficient of determination (R2)=0.06, P<.001; Stage II, F=40.28, R2=0.13, P<.001) but explained little of the variation in change in PrU area.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  In this sample of nursing facility residents, use of moist dressings (Stage II, Stage III and IV) and adequate nutritional support (Stage III and IV) are strong predictors of PrU healing.
authors.affiliation: School of Nursing, University of Texas at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.
authors.forename: Nancy
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Bergstrom
authors.forename: Susan D
authors.initials: SD
authors.lastname: Horn
authors.forename: Randall J
authors.initials: RJ
authors.lastname: Smout
authors.forename: Stacy A
authors.initials: SA
authors.lastname: Bender
authors.forename: Maree L
authors.initials: ML
authors.lastname: Ferguson
authors.forename: George
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Taler
authors.forename: Abby C
authors.initials: AC
authors.lastname: Sauer
authors.forename: Siohban S
authors.initials: SS
authors.lastname: Sharkey
authors.forename: Anne Coble
authors.initials: AC
authors.lastname: Voss
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D015331:Cohort Studies; D003131:Combined Modality Therapy / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D017050:Episode of Care; D005260:Female; D006707:Homes for the Aged / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D006801:Humans; D008134:Long-Term Care / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009735:Nursing Homes / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D010043:Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D003668:Pressure Ulcer / Q000145:classification / Q000628:therapy*; D012044:Regression Analysis; D012189:Retrospective Studies