Introduction
The Pressure Ulcer Prevention Education Plan aims to address incompetency issues among nursing staff that is mainly contributed by lack of proper knowledge. Prevention and management of pressure ulcers (PUs) amongst patients in various nursing and rehabilitation centers have been on the downward trend, evidenced by the increase in pressure ulcers in various stages amongst patients. In order to improve on prevention and management of pressure ulcers, the education plan focused on educating nurses on how to improve the well-being of geriatric patients, bed-bound, and patients with limited mobility (Lamppu et al., 2019).
During the four weeks of educating the nurses on pressure ulcers prevention and management, nurses were given a pre-test and post-test to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the pressure ulcers prevention education plan. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the effectiveness of evidence-based practices in increasing the knowledge of nursing staff during the implementation of a quality improvement education plan on pressure ulcers prevention amongst patients.
Strategies
The plan of action for the project is to increase the knowledge retainment of nursing staff on pressure ulcers prevention by using evidence-based practices. The education of nurses and unlicensed assistive personnel (UAP) will go for four weeks and trained on the prevention of pressure ulcers on the specified population of patients. The targeted population includes malnourished, immobile, geriatric, limited mobility, and other vulnerable patients and can easily develop pressure ulcers. During the four weeks of training, nurses will be supplied with learning materials, knowledge, and education required to help prevent and manage PUs. Nurses and UAPs are assessed using Piper’s pressure ulcers knowledge test before and after training to put their understanding into a test.
Advantages of the Pressure Ulcer Prevention Education Plan
A clear advantage of the Pressure Ulcer Prevention Plan is that it protects patients from harm associated with pressure ulcers. According to Lavallée et al. (2018), increasing knowledge of an interdisciplinary approach amongst nurses reduces patients’ susceptibility to pressure ulcers by up to 45%. Once patience is infected with pressure ulcers, it takes a long time to heal. This makes the treatment of pressure ulcers patients costly. It cost the hospital approximately $40,000 to treat each occurrence of pressure ulcers (Rutenberg et al., 2019). Moreover, the occurrence of pressure ulcers increases a patient’s hospital stay by 12 to 20 days. Therefore, it is crucial to prevent pressure ulcers to avoid cost implications on patience.
Limitations of The Pressure Ulcer Prevention Education Plan
The plan had several limitations on quality enhancement in healthcare delivery. One of the limitations is the short length of the project that was only restricted to four weeks. The short duration can produce a biased result that is either a false-positive result or an over-estimated magnitude of association in the result (Berete et al., 2021). Another substantial limitation of the research is the use of a small study population. The study was conducted in a single health facility with a nurses population of less than 100. The smaller the sample size of the study, the higher the margin of error. An increase in the margin of error reduces the accuracy and the power of research.
Ethical issues Related to the plan
In a study that involves an individual’s health information, the main ethical issue is always the respondent’s privacy. In this study, both nurses’ privacy, UAPs, and the patients were adequately observed. Nurses and UAPs were asked to conceal patients’ information and avoid using patients’ names when responding to pre-test and post-test (Dale & Helton, 2018). To effect this, nurses and UAPs signed consent and privacy non-disclosure form. Similarly, nurses’ and UAPs’ privacy were also observed, and all were asked to avoid their identity when submitting their tests. To observe the privacy of nurses and UAPs, nurses were asked to submit their responses for the tests through a sealed box. Following these guidelines, the pressure ulcers prevention plan complied with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) privacy rules that regulate protected healthcare information disclosure.
Results
The objective of the pressure ulcers prevention plan was to educate nurses and UAPs on how to manage and prevent pressure ulcers on staying patients. Nurses and UAPs were educated on how to prevent and manage pressure ulcers in a healthcare facility. In order to evaluate the project’s overall outcome, nurses and UAPs were given a pre-test and pro-test using Piper’s Pressure Ulcers Knowledge Test. The pre-test and pro-test data were compared to check the effectiveness of the project outcome in the four weeks duration. Before the project’s commencement, the target outcome of the retainment rate was set at 75% after week four post-test assessment.
The retainment of interdisciplinary approach knowledge was also placed at 75%. At the end of week four, 100% of the nursing staff were expected to demonstrate mastering of knowledge on the repositioning of the patient. Another targeted milestone is that 80% of the nursing staff were expected to identify all the pressure ulcer assessment steps accurately.
The outcome from the test results showed significant improvement in the tested areas. At the beginning of the project, the Piper’s Pressure Ulcers pre-test indicates that only 60% of the nursing staff demonstrated effective knowledge in evidence-based practice on pressure ulcers prevention. At the end of the fourth week, 92% was recorded on the post-test outcome. On the interdisciplinary approach, 74% was recorded on the pre-test and 96% on the post-test (Gaspar et al., 2019). When it comes to knowledge on the repositioning of patients, 55% was recorded on pre-test and 95% on post-test. In mastering the steps for pressure ulcers assessment, only 40% of the nursing staff were able to outline all the steps, and after four weeks, 90% were able to identify all the assessment steps.
The result of the project at the end of the fourth week shows a significant improvement in the critical elements of preventing and managing pressure ulcers condition in the patient. All the targeted milestones set at the beginning of the project were attained apart from patient repositioning, which only attained 95% instead of 100% as the targeted outcome. This is attributed to a few UAPs who failed to demonstrate an understanding of patient repositioning to prevent and manage pressure ulcers (Moore et al., 2019). The improvement in knowledge retainment among nursing staff is reflected in the pressure ulcers incidences in the healthcare facility. The pressure ulcer cases reduced from 4.2% before education to 3.2% after education.
Conclusion
The paper aimed to outline the strategies and the results of the pressure ulcers prevention education plan. One significant advantage of educating nursing staff on the prevention and management of pressure ulcers is that it significantly reduces the incidences of pressure ulcers among patients. From the result obtained, all the study areas incorporated in the project resulted in a massive improvement in preventing and managing pressure ulcers.
Despite the positive outcome, the accuracy of the project is reduced by the small sample size used in the project, which tends to increase the margin of error. According to Dale and Helton (2018), the credibility of a study is based on its relativity to the set universal standards, which the project lacks. A comparative analysis helps in getting more diverse and comprehensive information on the subject of research.
References
Berete, F., Heyden, J. V. D., Demarest, S., Charafeddine, R., Tafforeau, J., Oyen, H. V., & Renard, F. (2021). Validity of self-reported mammography uptake in the Belgian health interview survey: Selection and reporting bias. European Journal of Public Health, 31(1), 214-220. Web.
Dale, M. C., & Helton, M. R. (2018). Nursing Home Care 20. Chronic Illness Care: Principles and Practice, 245.
Gaspar, S., Peralta, M., Marques, A., Budri, A., & Gaspar de Matos, M. (2019). Effectiveness on hospital‐acquired pressure ulcers prevention: A systematic review. International Wound Journal, 16(5), 1087-1102. Web.
Lamppu, P. J., Laurila, J., Finne-Soveri, H., Laakkonen, M. L., Kautiainen, H., & Pitkälä, K. H. (2019). Training nursing home staff to improve residents’ end-of-life care: Design and baseline findings from a randomized controlled trial. European Geriatric Medicine, 10(4), 649-657. Web.
Lavallée, J. F., Gray, T. A., Dumville, J., & Cullum, N. (2018). Barriers and facilitators to preventing pressure ulcers in nursing home residents: A qualitative analysis informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 82, 79-89. Web.
Moore, Z., Avsar, P., Conaty, L., Moore, D. H., Patton, D., & O’Connor, T. (2019). The prevalence of pressure ulcers in Europe, the European data tell us: A systematic review. Journal of Wound Care, 28(11), 710-719. Web.
Rutenberg, T. F., Assaly, A., Vitenberg, M., Shemesh, S., Burg, A., Haviv, B., & Velkes, S. (2019). The outcome of non-surgical treatment of proximal femur fractures in the fragile elderly population. Injury, 50(7), 1347-1352. Web.