Pressure Ulcers
Medical professionals often have to deal with medical-device related pressure ulcers during their practice. This problem creates significant discomfort for patients and additional costs for the healthcare industry. It is necessary to carry out detailed original research to solve such a complex issue. One of the initial stages of any original research is to analyze other academic sources. This paper aims to review and evaluate three peer-reviewed research articles related to medical-device related pressure ulcers.
Articles Analysis
An article by Gefen et al. explores the topic of pressure ulcer occurrence prophylaxis. Their study’s focus is infrared thermography as a method of preventing medical-device related pressure ulcers and investigating prophylactic device utility. The researchers concluded that infrared thermography is useful for assessing the safety and efficiency of prophylactic device designs. However, it is not practical for preventing the emergence of medical-device related pressure ulcers because “it cannot distinguish between opposite trends of effects on tissue temperature that originate from inflammation versus ischaemia” (Gefen et al., 2019, p. 14). The article is credible because it is text-oriented with a small number of images; the authors investigate a specific topic and conduct original research. It is also important to mention that all Wounds International articles are peer-reviewed, and the source is provided with the reference list. This article is essential for the original study because infrared thermography analysis may serve as a means to assess and improve the design and application procedure of prophylactic devices and dressings.
Another article by Gefen, Santamaria, et al. researches the topic of preventive dressings in the pharmacological and medical fields. They investigate pharmacological and clinical ethics, the advisability of value analysis, and the possibility of developing a universal framework for evaluating prophylactic tools. Gefen, Santamaria, et al. (2018) argue that a universal assessment system is impossible because “each engineering design will result in a different protective outcome and should be tested independently” (p. 15). They also criticize value analysis and overall cost-based methodology in clinical practice, urging colleagues to adhere to the scientific evidence-based principle (Gefen, Santamaria, et al., 2018). This source is also credible because it meets the WCU evaluation criteria and belongs to the same publisher as the first reviewed article. The value for the original research is that this academic source is an essential component for the development of an evaluation system of the functionality of prophylactic devices and the injury occurrence probability checklists.
Another academic source that was reviewed for the original research is an article by Delmore and Ayello. According to them, “the authors discuss the etiology and prevention of PIs resulting from medical and other devices…” (Delmore & Ayello, 2017, p. 36). The authors also investigate such related factors as which age groups are most at risk for medical-device related pressure ulcers. The article is text-oriented; however, there are a significant number of photos. The authors investigate a narrowly focused topic, but the original research is based on other literature sources. The publisher of the article is The American Journal of Nursing. It means that the article is peer-reviewed. This source will serve as an informative basis for forming the assessment system of the medical-device related pressure ulcer occurrence probability.
Conclusion
The work examines three scholarly papers and evaluates their usefulness for upcoming original research on recognizing and treating medical-device-related pressure ulcers. The reviewed articles cover topics such as causes of medical-device pressure ulcers and its occurrence prophylaxis, and related themes such as most vulnerable social groups and prophylactic devices functionality. The author summarized each of the articles, assessed their credibility, and highlighted their academic significance.
References
Delmore, B. A., & Ayello, E. A. (2017). CE: Pressure injuries caused by medical devices and other objects: a clinical update. The American Journal of Nursing, 117(12), 36-45. Web.
Gefen, A., Cohen, L. P., Amrani, G., Hoffer, O., & Ovadia‐Blechman, Z. (2019). The roles of infrared thermography in pressure ulcer research with focus on skin microclimate induced by medical devices and prophylactic dressings. Wounds Int, 10(1), 8-15. Web.
Gefen, A., Santamaria, N., Creehan, S., & Black, J. (2018). Extrapolation of evidence-related to dressings for pressure ulcer prevention may compromise patient safety. Wounds Int, 9(2), 10-17. Web.