Preventing Pressure Ulcers in Hospitals

A Systematic Review of Nurse-Focused Quality Improvement Interventions

Published in: The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety, v. 37, no. 6, June 2011, p. 245-252, AP1-AP16

Posted on on May 31, 2011

by Lynn Soban, Susanne Hempel, Brett Ewing, Jeremy N. V. Miles, Lisa V. Rubenstein

Read More

Access further information on this document at

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

BACKGROUND: A systematic review of the literature on nurse-focused interventions conducted in the hospital setting informs the evidence base for implementation of pressure ulcer (PU) prevention programs. Despite the availability of published guidelines, there is little evidence about which interventions can be successfully integrated into routine care through quality improvement (QI). The two previous literature syntheses on PU prevention have included articles from multiple settings but have not focused specifically on QI. METHODS: A search of six electronic databases for publications from January 1990 to September 2009 was conducted. Trial registries and bibliographies of retrieved studies and reviews, and Internet sites of funding agencies were also searched. Using standardized forms, two independent reviewers screened publications for eligibility into the sample; data were abstracted and study quality was assessed for those that passed screening. FINDINGS: Thirty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Most of them used a before-and-after study design in a single site. Intervention strategies included PU-specific changes in combination with educational and/or QI strategies. Most studies reported patient outcome measures, while fewer reported nursing process of care measures. For nearly all the studies, the authors concluded that the intervention had a positive effect. The pooled risk difference for developing PUs was –.07 (95% confidence interval [CI]: –0.0976, –0.0418) comparing the pre- and postintervention status. CONCLUSION: Future research can build the evidence base for implementation through an increased emphasis on understanding the mechanisms by which improved outcomes are achieved and describing the conditions under which specific intervention strategies are likely to succeed or fail.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.