Pressure Ulcers/Injuries

Pressure ulcers/injuries among patients and healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic (18:00 - 18:30)

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has brought the impact of device-related pressure ulcers (DRPUs) into sharp focus and global public attention. With such a considerable global rise in the numbers of patients requiring intensive care and the increased use of prone positioning to treat acute respiratory distress syndrome, the incidence of DRPUs is expected to climb starkly. In addition, a new and common type of DRPUs associated with the pandemic appeared among healthcare professionals (HCPs): Skin tears (friction lesions) caused by personal protective equipment (PPE), primarily medical face masks and goggles. Clearly, in clinical settings, such skin breaks among HCPs highly increase the risk of COVID-19 infections, with potentially fatal results to the affected individuals.

Under these circumstances, the recently published Journal of Wound Care International Consensus Document on Prevention of DRPUs (‘SECURE Prevention’) developed during 2019-2020 is more timely than ever. This talk will discuss DRPUs in the context of the aforementioned Consensus Document and as related to the specific medical devices used to treat COVID-19 patients requiring intensive care, as well as the widespread use of PPE and the skin damage that they were shown to cause.

Recent Developments in Pressure Ulcer Prevention (18:30 - 19:00)

In this session Professor Amit Gefen speaks about Recent Developments in Pressure Ulcer Prevention.

He developed an experimental-computational analysis framework which facilitated objective, quantitative, standardized, methodological and systematic comparisons between the biomechanical efficacies of different dressing technologies for pressure ulcer prevention: A dressing technology based on cellulose fibres used as the core matrix was evaluated versus the silicone-foam dressing design concept. Using an anatomically-realistic computer model of a supine patient to whom multiple various sacral dressings have been applied virtually, we quantitatively evaluated the efficacy of the different dressings by means of a set of 3 biomechanical indices: The protective efficacy index, the protective endurance and the prophylactic trade-off design parameter.

Prior rigorous experimental measurements of the physical and mechanical behaviours and properties of each tested dressing, including tensile, compressive and friction properties, have been conducted and used as inputs for the computer modelling. Each dressing was evaluated for its tissue protection performances at a new (from the package) state, as well as after exposure to moisture conditions simulating wet bedsheets.

To apply for CPD after watching on-demand, please email nurseledconferences@markallengroup.com

His results demonstrated that the dressing with the fluff core is at least as-good as silicone-foams but importantly, provides the best balance between protective performances at its ‘new’ condition and the performance after being exposed to moisture. We conclude that preventative dressings are not equal in their prophylactic performances, but rather, the base technology, the ingredients and their arrangement in the dressing structure shape the quality of the delivered tissue protection.