Improving Braden Scale Documentation for Pressure-Injury Risk Assessment: A Closed-Loop Clinical Audit at Dongola
Rowa Adil Mohamed Elharadallo1, Suzan Mohammed Eltayeb Eltahir2, Mohammed Ali Mohammed Ali3
1Pediatric Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh, SAU.
Background:
Pressure injuries remain a significant and largely preventable cause of morbidity among hospitalized patients. Accurate and complete risk assessment using validated tools such as the Braden Scale is fundamental to effective prevention; however, documentation practices are often inconsistent, particularly in resource-limited settings.
Objective:
To evaluate the completeness of Braden Scale documentation in the Internal Medicine Department at Dongola Specialized Hospital and to assess the impact of a targeted quality-improvement intervention through a closed-loop clinical audit.
Methods:
A prospective closed-loop clinical audit was conducted over two cycles, each reviewing 51 patient records. Baseline documentation practices (Cycle 1) were assessed against predefined standards derived from international pressure-injury prevention guidelines. Following a structured two-month intervention comprising staff education, reinforcement of documentation expectations, and introduction of a standardized Braden documentation form, a second audit cycle (Cycle 2) was performed using identical criteria. Documentation completeness was analyzed using descriptive statistics, and differences between cycles were assessed using chi-square tests.
Results:
At baseline, none of the Braden subscale scores, total scores, risk levels, or preventive actions were documented. Following the intervention, documentation of all six Braden subscales improved to near-universal completion (96.4-100%). Documentation of total Braden score, risk level, and preventive actions increased to 89.1%, 83.6%, and 89.1%, respectively (all p < 0.001). Significant improvements were also observed in consultant identification and bed number documentation. Conversely, completion rates for certain demographic fields, particularly hospital number and admission date, declined in Cycle 2.
Conclusion:
This audit demonstrates that targeted education and standardized documentation tools can lead to substantial and statistically significant improvements in Braden Scale documentation. While clinical risk assessment practices improved markedly, persistent gaps in administrative documentation highlight the need for sustained monitoring and system-level reinforcement. Closed-loop clinical audits represent an effective strategy for strengthening pressure-injury risk assessment practices in hospital settings.
Related Concept Videos
Assessment of blood pressure in brachial artery(one-step method)
Prepare for the Procedure:
Assessment of blood pressure in brachial artery(two-step method)
Assessing Blood pressure using a doppler ultrasound
Pre-Procedural Guidelines for Doppler Ultrasound Blood Pressure Assessment:
Preparation of Equipment:
Assessing Blood pressure in the Leg
Preparation:
SBAR II: Application of SBAR
SBAR Report from a Nurse to a Health Care Provider
S: "Hello, Dr. Smith. This is Jane, RN, from the Med Surg unit. I am calling to tell you about Ms. White in Room 210, who is experiencing increased pain and redness at her incision site. Her recent...
Pre-Procedural Guidelines for Assessing Blood Pressure


