Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 26, 2025
Mouse Model of Pressure Ulcers After Spinal Cord Injury
Published on: March 9, 2019
Risk factors for hospital-acquired and community-acquired pressure injuries: a multicentre mixed case-control study
Lei Ding1, Xia Hu2,3, Lili Wei4
1Department of Quality Management and Evaluation, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong, China 05gw@163.com dinglei@qduhospital.cn lihuanting26@163.com.
Objectives:
To separately examine and comprehensively compare the risk factors for hospital-acquired (HAPIs) and community-acquired pressure injuries (CAPIs).
Design:
A mixed case-control study.
Setting:
Four medical centres in China.
Participants:
Inclusion criteria included patients who were (1) aged ≥18 years on admission; (2) admitted between January 2014 and December 2018, and (3) diagnosed with HAPIs (cases) or with no HAPIs (controls) during hospitalisation in the HAPIs study, and confirmed with CAPIs (cases) or with no PIs (controls) on admission in the CAPIs study. The exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) admitted for childbirth, psychiatric reasons or rehabilitation; (2) admitted for observation; (3) transferred from another hospital and (4) confirmed to have suffered PIs from previous hospitalisations in the CAPIs study. In total, 320 cases and 1657 controls were included in the HAPIs study, and 1763 cases and 1786 controls were included in the CAPIs study.
Primary And Secondary Outcome Measures:
The outcome variable was the occurrence of PIs.
Results:
The existence of PIs or scars from previous PIs on admission, presence of forced posture, use of medical devices and surgery during hospitalisation were found to be independent risk factors for HAPIs, as evidenced by the corresponding OR and 95% CI values of 51.931 (34.241 to 78.763), 2.006 (1.405 to 2.864), 3.226 (1.709 to 6.089) and 2.161 (1.452 to 3.215), respectively. Age, sex, Braden rating and diabetes were found to be independent risk factors for CAPIs, as evidenced by the corresponding OR and 95% CI values of 1.031 (1.026 to 1.036), 0.810 (0.698 to 0.941), 1.235 (1.167 to 1.307) and 2.059 (1.332 to 3.184), respectively.
Conclusions:
The existence of PIs or scars from previous PIs on admission, presence of forced posture, use of medical devices and surgery during hospitalisation are suggested to be included as independent items for the risk assessment of PIs, together with the Braden scale. The Braden rating plays different roles in the development of CAPIs and HAPIs.
More Related Videos
09:37Application of Lucilia sericata Larvae in Debridement of Pressure Wounds in Outpatient Settings
Published on: December 4, 2021
06:45Development of a Benchtop Model for Evaluating the Compatibility of Wound Dressing Materials with Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Systems
Published on: May 2, 2025
Related Concept Videos
01:22Healthcare Associated Infections II: Preventive Measures
The best practices for preventing healthcare-associated infections include hand hygiene, patient risk...
01:26Factors Affecting the Risk of Infection
The integrity and count of the white blood cells help the body resist pathogens and fight infection. When impaired, it reduces the body's resistance to pathogens. The acidic pH levels of the gastrointestinal, genitourinary tracts, and skin...
01:26Healthcare Associated Infections I: Iatrogenic, Exogenic and Endogenic
HAIs significantly increase the cost of health care. Extended stays in healthcare institutions, increased disability, increased costs of medications, including specialized antibiotics, and prolonged recovery times add to the patient's expenses and the healthcare institution and funding bodies.
01:10Pre-Procedural Guidelines for Assessing Blood Pressure
01:25Errors occurring during blood pressure monitoring
Several factors...
01:26Standard Precaution
Hand hygiene is the most crucial means to prevent the transmission of disease. Employers are legally required to provide their workers with personal protective equipment (PPE) to minimize exposure or contact with...