A Cross-sectional Descriptive Study of Pressure Ulcer Prevalence in a Teaching Hospital in China

Login to Download
PDF version
Start Page: 
38
End Page: 
42
Author(s): 
Guanghong Zhao, RN, PhD; Elizabeth Hiltabidel, MSN, RN, CWOCN; Yilan Liu, RN, PhD; LingLing Chen, RN, MSNc; and Yongzhen Liao, RN, MSN

Abstract: Surveying pressure ulcer (PU) prevalence is a common practice in some western countries and has served as a tool to improve prevention policies and procedures. Although attention on PU prevention has increased in China, no PU prevalence baseline information is available to help guide care. To obtain this baseline information, a cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted in a 3,000-bed teaching hospital in Wuhan. On the morning of the study, trained clinicians audited the total hospital patient population (61 nursing units, 2,913 inpatients) using the PU survey tool designed by National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators®. The majority of the patients (1,648, 56.6%) were male, average patient age was 43.91 (±21.20) years, range 1 to 94 years. The overall PU prevalence rate was 1.8% (52 patients/79 ulcers). The hospital-acquired prevalence rate was 1.54% (0.82% when Stage I ulcers were excluded). Prevalence rates were highest in the ICU (45.5%) and most ulcers (53.2%) were located in the sacral-coccyx area. The results of this study suggest that overall PU prevalence rates are low compared to data from other countries. Differences in patient acuity, average patient length-of-stay, and prevention practices may explain these observations. The results of this study can guide hospital prevention efforts and serve as a benchmark for PU prevalence studies in China.



Please address correspondence to: Liu Yilan, RN, PhD, Department of Nursing, Union Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology 1277 Jiefang Avenue, Wuhan, 430022, China; email: yilanl@yahoo.com.




     Prevalence is the proportion of all cases of a condition among a population considered at risk for developing that condition at one point in time1,2 — an indicator of the extent of a particular health problem on a set day. Determining prevalence can provide useful information about the magnitude of a health problem.3

     Measuring pressure ulcer (PU) prevalence has been shown to have important implications for basic nursing and quality control. Numerous studies on PU prevalence have been conducted in western countries over the past 20 years with widely varying findings. The first PU prevalence survey to capture reliable data throughout the US and set the benchmark for PU measurement was conducted in 1989.4 Subsequently, this survey has been conducted every 2 years in the US and after 2003, some facilities in other countries such as Canada, Saudi Arabia, and Australia also participated.5,6 Overall and nosocomial PU prevalence rates in these studies were 9.2% and 5.6%, respectively in 1989, and 15.5% and 10% in 2003 and 2004. In subsequent years, the reported international overall and nosocomial PU prevalence rates were 13.5% and 6.2%, respectively, in 20067 and 13.7% and 6.1%, respectively, in 2007.8 In the UK pediatric population, PU prevalence was 0.47% in 1998.9 In Canada, the PU prevalence rate was 29.7%10 in a teaching hospital in 1996 and the national mean prevalence rate was 26% in 2006.11

     A European study published in 2007 and conducted in five countries (Belgium, Italy, Portugal, UK, and Sweden) reported PU prevalence (Stage I through Stage IV, based on the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel [NPUAP] scale) of 18.1%.

References: 

1. Gallagher SM. Outcomes in clinical practice: pressure ulcer prevalence and incidence studies. Ostomy Wound Manage.1997;43(1):28–40.
2. National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators® (NDNQI). Pressure Ulcer Prevalence Study. Available at: www.nursingquality.org/NDNQIPressureUlcerTraining/module1/staging17b.aspx. Accessed March 5, 2009.
3. Kottner J, Wilborn D, Dassen T, Lahmann N. The trend of pressure ulcer prevalence rates in German hospitals: results of seven cross-sectional studies. J Tissue Viability. 2008;18(2):36–46.
4. Meehan M. Multisite pressure ulcer prevalence survey. Decubitus. 1990;3(4):14–17.
5. Amlung SR, Miller WL, Bosley LM. The 1999 National Pressure Ulcer Prevalence Survey: a benchmarking approach. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2001;14(6):297–301.
6. VanGilder C, Macfarlane GD, Meyer S. Results of nine international pressure ulcer prevalence surveys: 1989 to 2005. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2008;54(2):40–54.
7. VanGilder C, Decker S, Lanigan G, et al. 2006 International Pressure Ulcer Prevalence™ Survey results. J WOCN. 2007;3(3 suppl):S561.
8. VanGilder C, Gordon M, Stephanie M, et al. Body mass index, weight, and pressure ulcer prevalence: an analysis of the 2006-2007 International Pressure Ulcer Prevalence™ Surveys. J Nurs Care Qual. 2008;23(4):1–9.
9. Baldwin KM. Incidence and prevalence of pressure ulcers in children. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2002;15(3):121–124.
10. Harrison MB, Wells G, Fisher A, Prince M. Practice guidelines for the prediction and prevention of pressure ulcers: evaluating the evidence. Appl Nurs Res.1996;9(1):9–17.
11. Orsted HL, Rosenthal S, Woodbury MG. Pressure ulcer awareness and prevention program: a quality improvement program through the Canadian Association of Wound Care. J WOCN. 2009;36(2):178–183.
12. Vanderwee K, Clark M, Dealey C, Gunningberg L, DeFloor T. Pressure ulcer prevalence in Europe: a pilot study. J Eval Clin Pract. 2007;13(2):227–235.
13. Lahmann NA, Halfens RJ, Dassen T. Prevalence of pressure ulcers in Germany. J Clin Nurs. 2005;14(2):165–172.
14. Schoonhoven L, Bousema M, Buskens E. The prevalence and incidence of pressure ulcers in hospitalised patients in the Netherlands: a prospective inception cohort study. Int J Nurs Stud. 2007;44:927–935.
15. Gallagher P, Barry P, Hartogan I, McCluskey P, O’Connor K, O’Connor M. Prevalence of pressure ulcers in three university teaching hospitals in Ireland. J Tissue Viabil. 2008;17(4):103–109.
16. Gruen RL, Chang S, MacLellan DG. The point prevalence of wounds in a teaching hospital. Aust NZ J Surg. 2008;67(10):686–688.
17. Pearson A, Francis K, Hodgkinson B, Curry G. Prevalence and treatment of pressure ulcers in Northern New South Wales. Aust J Rural Health. 2000;8(2):103–110.
18. Ministry of Health of the People’s Republic of China. Guidance for Hospital Management Evaluation (2008). Available at: www.moh.gov.cn. Accessed May 23, 2008.
19. Wang H, Chen WJ, Zhou RP, et al. The establishment and application of the pressure ulcer management procedure. Chinese J Nurs Admin. 2007;7(2):47–48.
20. SU XH. Three-level quality control in pressure ulcer nursing in vertebral column surgery department. Chinese Nurs Manage. 2008;8(5):70–72.
21. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. AHRQ Quality Indicators-Guide to Patient Safety Indicators. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality;2003.
22. National Agency for Quality Assurance in Germany. Available at: www.bqs-online.ed/. Accessed March 5, 2009.
23. National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators® (NDNQI) Pressure Ulcer Training. Pressure Ulcer Prevalence Study Protocol Module. Available at: www.nursingquality.org/ndnqipressureulcertraining/module3/protocol12.aspx. Accessed March 5, 2009.
24. National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators® (NDNQI) Pressure Ulcer Training. Pressure ulcers and staging module. Available at: www.nursingquality.org/ndnqipressureulcertlcers g/module1/default.aspx. Accessed March 5,2009.
25. National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel. Pressure ulcers prevalence, cost and risk assessment: consensus development conference statement. Decubitus.1989;2:24–28.
26. Liu YL, Zhang L, Wang GL, et al. Thinking about management of nursing error in China. Chinese J Nurs. 2007;42(9):827–829.
27. Ministry of Health of People’s Republic of China. 2007 Chinese Health Statistical Digest. Number of Health Personnel. Available at: www.moh.gov.cn/open/2007tjts/P97.htm. Accessed February 6, 2008.
28. America Hospital Association. Hospital Statistics. 2007:6.
29. Gunningberg L. EPUAP pressure ulcer prevalence survey in Sweden. J WOCN. 2006;33(3):258–266.





























Post new comment

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Use to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.