Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 18, 2026

An Educational Video Demonstration of How to Prone a Critically Ill Intubated Patient
Published on: November 30, 2022
Assessment tools for the risk of pressure injury in children: A systematic review
Faustine Dessi1, Julien Valeille2, Pascale Beloni2,1,3
1Inserm U1094, IRD U270, Univ. Limoges, CHU Limoges, EpiMaCT - Epidemiology of chronic diseases in tropical zone, Institute of Epidemiology and Tropical Neurology, OmegaHealth, Limoges, France.
Insights
This systematic review evaluated pediatric pressure injury risk assessment tools. The Braden QD, Braden Q, and Glamorgan scales show promise, especially in intensive care, but no single tool fits all pediatric settings.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Nursing
- Clinical Risk Assessment
- Patient Safety
Background:
- Pressure injuries in children increase morbidity and mortality.
- Effective risk assessment tools are crucial but vary in pediatric applicability.
- Current tools need evaluation for diverse pediatric populations.
Purpose of the Study:
- To identify and evaluate pediatric pressure injury risk assessment tools.
- Focus on tool characteristics, validation, reliability, and applicability.
- Assess tools across various pediatric clinical contexts.
Main Methods:
- Systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42024527687) following Cochrane Handbook.
- Searched five databases (PubMed, Scholar, CINAHL, Web of Science, Embase) from 2010-2024.
- Included studies on pediatric pressure injury risk assessment tool development, use, or validation; assessed quality using QUADAS-2, QAREL, and COSMIN.
Main Results:
- 28 studies from 15 countries met criteria, focusing on intensive care, general, and surgical units.
- Ten risk assessment tools identified, including Braden Q, Braden QD, and Glamorgan scales.
- Braden QD was most evaluated; others like Pediatric Pressure Ulcer Prediction and Evaluation Tool were adapted for pediatric/neonatal use.
Conclusions:
- All tools showed acceptable validity and reliability, but none are universally applicable.
- Braden QD, Braden Q, and Glamorgan scales are comprehensive, especially in ICUs.
- Further research needed to improve accuracy and adaptability across pediatric settings.
Background:
Pressure injuries in pediatric patients are associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and prolonged hospital stays, making the identification of effective risk assessment tools critical in clinical practice. Accurate risk assessment is essential in clinical practice. Although several assessment tools exist, their applicability and effectiveness vary across pediatric populations.
Objective:
To identify and evaluate tools designed to assess the risk of pressure injuries in children, focusing on their characteristics, validation populations, reliability, and applicability across different clinical contexts.
Design:
A systematic review was conducted.
Methods:
This systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42024527687) was conducted in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook. Comprehensive searches were performed in five databases-PubMed, Google Scholar, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Embase-for studies published between January 2010 and March 2024. Eligible studies included those describing the development, use, or validation of pressure injury risk assessment tools in children. Two independent reviewers conducted the selection and appraisal process. Methodological quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 and QAREL checklists, with general reference to COSMIN guidelines.
Results:
Of 964 records screened, 28 studies met the inclusion criteria, encompassing research from 15 countries, with Brazil being the most represented. Studies focused on pediatric and neonatal intensive care units, general wards, and surgical units. Ten different risk assessment tools were identified, including the Braden Q, Braden QD, and Glamorgan scales. The Braden QD scale-an adaptation of the Braden Q including medical device-related risk-was the most frequently evaluated. Other tools, such as the Pediatric Pressure Ulcer Prediction and Evaluation Tool and the Braden Q+P, were specifically developed or adapted for pediatric and neonatal use.
Conclusions:
All identified tools demonstrated acceptable validity and inter-rater reliability. However, no single tool proved universally applicable across all pediatric contexts. The Braden QD, Braden Q, and Glamorgan scales emerged as the most comprehensive, particularly in intensive care settings, aligning with National and European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel recommendations. Further research is warranted to enhance tool accuracy and contextual adaptability across pediatric care environments.
Guidelines:
PRISMA.
Related Concept Videos
Pre-Procedural Guidelines for Assessing Blood Pressure
Assessment of blood pressure in brachial artery(one-step method)
Prepare for the Procedure:
Assessment of apical radial pulse
The A-R pulse assessment involves simultaneous evaluation of the apical and radial pulses. When the apical and radial pulse rates vary, this assessment helps identify a pulse deficit.
Pre-Procedural Preparation
Healthcare Associated Infections II: Preventive Measures
The best practices for preventing healthcare-associated infections include hand hygiene, patient risk...

