Hospital pressure ulcer prevalence rates and number of raters.

Aim: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of different numbers of nurse raters conducting skin inspection (one or two) on observed pressure ulcer prevalence rates.

Background: Pressure ulcer prevalence and incidence rates are important outcome measures for the quality of care. To ensure reliability and comparability of such rates standardisation of study methods is recommended. It is assumed that data accuracy can be improved if skin inspection is conducted by a team of two raters.

Design: A secondary data analysis of pressure ulcer prevalence data was conducted.

Method: Groups of hospital patients which were examined by one (n = 2420) or two raters (n = 15,009) were compared regarding demographic characteristics, pressure ulcer risk and pressure ulcer prevalence. Logistic regressions were conducted to examine the association between the number of raters (one or two) and the outcome pressure ulcer (yes/no).

Results: Groups of one and two raters were comparable regarding demographic characteristics. There was no statistically significant difference regarding pressure ulcer prevalence between both groups (p = 0.222). There was no relation between the number of raters and the probability of identifying a pressure ulcer patient (p = 0.060).

Conclusions: Pressure ulcer prevalence rates in the analysed studies were not affected by the number of raters. There seems to be no relation between the numbers of nurses conducting skin inspection and observed prevalence rates.

Relevance To Clinical Practice: Conducting pressure ulcer prevalence studies require a lot of effort and personal costs. Provided that one nurse alone or a team of two nurses rate the existence of pressure ulcers equally it is no longer obligatory to have two raters. This would save resources. However, when patients are restricted in their mobility two nurses are recommended to provide assistance in patient turning.