Pressure ulcer prevention in homecare: do Dutch homecare agencies have an evidence-based pressure ulcer protocol?
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to gain insight into the availability and quality of protocols for pressure ulcer prevention in homecare agencies in the Netherlands.


METHODS
A descriptive study was completed.


METHODS
Forty-one homecare agencies in the Netherlands that provide nursing care were queried.


METHODS
Three instruments were used to collect data: (1) a structured questionnaire containing 46 closed and open-ended questions, (2) a checklist used by experts to analyze the protocols for conformity to guidelines, and (3) a tool used to generate a numerical score for each protocol based on the experts' reviews.


METHODS
A questionnaire was mailed to all homecare agencies in the Netherlands that provided nursing care. The quality of each protocol was judged and scored by 3 pressure ulcer prevention experts. The scores were analyzed using descriptive statistics.


RESULTS
A pressure ulcer protocol was available in 78% of the agencies. Seventy-five percent had at least 1 wound care nurse who spent an average of 10 hours per week on pressure ulcer prevention. In 20% of the agencies, no introduction or instruction was given to the nurses when the protocol was implemented. In 25% of the agencies, nurses did not participate in the revision of the protocol. At the end of 2003, only 13% of the agencies had executed 1 or more revisions of their protocol since 2002, when the last Dutch pressure ulcer guideline was introduced. The 26 pressure ulcer prevention protocols had a mean score of 47 points out of a maximum of 100 points (range 9 to 82; SD, 18).


CONCLUSIONS
Although the use of protocols is considered an important adjunct in the prevention of pressure ulcers, 22% of the participating agencies did not have a pressure ulcer prevention protocol and 25% did not have wound care nurses, indicating a need for further promotion of standardized pressure ulcer prevention strategies. In addition, the available protocols were frequently of low quality or outdated, reflecting a need for increased attention to current and accurate tools to guide nursing practice.
Chaves
Lidice M
LM
University of Utrecht, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. pdmc@wxs.nl
Grypdonck
Mieke H F
MH
Defloor
Tom
T
D015984:Causality; D002985:Clinical Protocols / Q000592:standards; D003152:Community Health Nursing / Q000458:organization & administration; D003659:Decision Making, Organizational; D004059:Diffusion of Innovation; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine / Q000458:organization & administration*; D019983:Guideline Adherence / Q000592:standards / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D006301:Health Services Needs and Demand; D018574:Home Care Agencies / Q000458:organization & administration*; D006801:Humans; D009426:Netherlands; D009720:Nurse Clinicians / Q000458:organization & administration; D024802:Nurse's Role; D009730:Nursing Assessment; D015403:Nursing Evaluation Research; D009740:Nursing Staff / Q000193:education / Q000458:organization & administration / Q000523:psychology; D009936:Organizational Innovation; D010043:Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care; D017410:Practice Guidelines as Topic; D003668:Pressure Ulcer / Q000209:etiology / Q000517:prevention & control*; D011785:Quality Assurance, Health Care / Q000458:organization & administration; D018570:Risk Assessment; D017592:Skin Care / Q000451:nursing / Q000592:standards; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires