Wound care practices across two acute care settings: A comparative study

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
File version

Accepted Manuscript (AM)

Author(s)
Gillespie, Brigid M
Walker, Rachel
Lin, Frances
Roberts, Shelley
Eskes, Anne
Perry, Jodie
Birgan, Sean
Nieuwenhoven, Paul
Garrahy, Elizabeth
Probert, Rosalind
Chaboyer, Wendy
Primary Supervisor
Other Supervisors
Editor(s)
Date
2019
Size
File type(s)
Location
License
Abstract

Aim: Describe and compare current surgical wound care practices across two hospitals in two health services districts, Australia. Background: Surgical site infections (SSI) are a complication of surgery and occur in up to 9.5% of surgical procedures, yet they are preventable. Despite the existence of clinical guidelines for SSI prevention, there remains high variation in wound care practice. Design: Prospective comparative design using structured observations and chart audit. Methods: A specifically developed audit tool was used to collect data on observed wound care practices, documentation of wound assessment and practice, and patients’ clinical characteristics from patients’ electronic medical records. Structured observations of a consecutive sample of surgical patients receiving wound care with a convenience sample of nurses were undertaken. The manuscript adheres to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement. Results: In total, 154 nurses undertaking acute wound care and 257 surgical patients who received wound care were observed. Across hospitals, hand hygiene adherence after dressing change was lowest (Hospital A: 8/113, 7%; Hospital B: 16/144, 11%; χ2 8.93, p = .347). Most wound dressing practices were similar across sites, except hand hygiene prior to dressing change (Hospital A: 107/113, 95%; Hospital B: 131/144, 91%; (χ2 7.736, p = .021) and use of clean gloves using non‐touch technique (Hospital A: 88/113, 78%; Hospital B: 90/144, 63%; χ2 8.313, p = .016). The most commonly documented wound characteristic was wound type (Hospital A: 43/113, 38%; Hospital B: 70/144, 49%). What nurses documented differed significantly across sites (p<.05). Conclusions: Clinical variations in wound care practice is likely influenced by clinical context. Relevance to clinical practice: Using an evidence‐based approach to surgical wound management will help reduce patients’ risk of wound‐related complications.

Journal Title

Journal of Clinical Nursing

Conference Title
Book Title
Edition
Volume
Issue
Thesis Type
Degree Program
School
Publisher link
Patent number
Funder(s)
Grant identifier(s)
Rights Statement
Rights Statement

© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Wound care practices across two acute care settings: A comparative study, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 2019, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15135. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving (http://olabout.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-828039.html)

Item Access Status
Note

This publication has been entered into Griffith Research Online as an Advanced Online Version

Access the data
Related item(s)
Subject

Nursing

Health services and systems

Public health

Psychology

Persistent link to this record
Citation

Gillespie, BM; Walker, R; Lin, F; Roberts, S; Eskes, A; Perry, J; Birgan, S; Nieuwenhoven, P; Garrahy, E; Probert, R; Chaboyer, W, Wound care practices across two acute care settings: A comparative study, Journal of Clinical Nursing, 2019

Collections