Pressure Injury
Conditions
Keywords
Endotracheal Tube, Endotracheal Tube Holder, Bandage, Intensive Care Unit, Pressure Wound
Brief summary
This study was conducted to examine the effect of two different tube detection on pressure wound formation in the intensive care unit. The search was carried out with a total of 60 patients that 30 of 60 them are interventions and 30 of 60 as experiments, who were hospitalized in the anesthesia and reanimation intensive care unit of an Educational Research Hospital. The 60 patients who made up the sample were assigned 2 groups using a computer program that produced random numbers. For the purpose of the study, the groups were encoded as groups A and B, and each group was tested with two different endotracheal tube detection methods which was applied to the patients in the groups. Data from the study were collected using the introductory and clinical features form, the braden pressure wound risk diagnostic scale, the pressure ulcer recovery assessment scale, the international pressure wound staging system, and the eilers oral assessment guide. Patients in both groups were monitored for four days for oral presure injury. During this process, the tube detection of both groups was changed every 24 hours, and the tubes were repositioned every 4 hours. At the end of the fourth day, wound assesments of patients who developed pressure wounds were performed by using the international pressure staging system and the pressure ulcer recovery assessment scale. Relatives of the patients who were scheduled to conduct the study were informed about the study by oral and written and their consent was obtained.
Interventions
OTHERENDOTRAKEAL TUBE HOLDER
During this process, the tube detection of endotracheal tube holder was changed every 24 hours, and the tubes were repositioned every 4 hours. On the first day of the study, the oral mucosa of patients in this group was evaluated by the eliers oral evaluation guide.Then, with the Braden pressure wound risk diagnostic scale, patients ' Pressure Wound risk assessment was performed. Patients in this group were monitored for four days for oral pressure wound as of the day they were intubated. During this process, patients ' tube holder was changed every 24 hours and the tube was repositioned every 4 hours. At the end of the fourth day, wound evaluation of patients who developed pressure wounds was performed using the international pressure wound staging system and pressure ulcer Recovery Assessment Scale. In addition, pressure wounds of patients who developed pressure wounds were treated in accordance with the recommendation of a plastic surgeon.
OTHERBANDAGE
On the first day of the study, the oral mucosa of patients in this group was evaluated by the eliers oral evaluation guide.Then, with the Braden pressure wound risk diagnostic scale, patients ' Pressure Wound risk assessment was performed. Patients in this group were monitored for four days for oral pressure wound as of the day they were intubated. During this process, patients ' tube holder was changed every 24 hours and the tube was repositioned every 4 hours. At the end of the fourth day, wound evaluation of patients who developed pressure wounds was performed using the international pressure wound staging system and pressure ulcer Recovery Assessment Scale.In addition, pressure wounds of patients who developed pressure wounds were treated in accordance with the recommendation of a plastic surgeon.
Sponsors
Marmara University Pendik Training and Research Hospital
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
QUADRUPLE (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)
Intervention model description
The 60 patients who made up the sample were assigned 2 groups using a computer program that produced random numbers. For the purpose of the study, the groups were encoded as groups A and B, and each group was tested with two different endotracheal tube detection methods which was applied to the patients in the groups
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Must be between the ages of 18-65 * Must be intubated oratraceal
Exclusion criteria
* Oral pressure wounds * Burns on the face * Diabetes * Facial and neck trauma
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BANDAGE | At the end of the 4th day, the wound evaluation of the patients who developed pressure ulcers was made with the International Staging System for Pressure Injuries and The Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing. | It was determined that the bandage method was better than the ETT method in terms of both the pressure ulcer risk score difference and the tendency to fall, dislocate or remain stable |
| ENDOTRACHEAL TUBE HOLDER | At the end of the 4th day, the wound evaluation of the patients who developed pressure ulcers was made with the International Staging System for Pressure Injuries and The Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing. | It was determined that the bandage method was better than the ETT method in terms of both the pressure ulcer risk score difference and the tendency to fall, dislocate or remain stable |
Countries
Turkey (Türkiye)
Outcome results
None listed