The DOI matches its Crossref record.
An Instrument to Measure Healing in Pressure Ulcers: Development and Validation of the Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing (PUSH)
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Currently, there is no instrument that provides an accurate and simple method of monitoring pressure ulcer healing in clinical practice. This article reports the two studies that were conducted to assess the validity of the Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing (PUSH) as a tool to monitor healing of stage II-IV pressure ulcers. METHODS: Subjects in both studies (N = 103 and N = 269) were elderly (mean Study 1, 75 years, mean Study 2, 80 years), and the majority were women (Study 1, 51%, Study 2, 70%). Study data were extracted from patients' permanent records. RESULTS: Principal components analysis confirmed that the PUSH tool accounted for 58% to 74% of the wound healing variance over a 10-week period in Study 1 and 40% to 57% of the wound healing variance over a 12-week period in Study 2. In addition, multiple regression analysis, used to measure the sensitivity of the model to total healing, showed PUSH accounted for 39% of the variance in 6 weeks and 31% of the variance over 12 weeks (p <.001; Studies 1 and 2, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Data from these two studies confirmed that the PUSH tool, with the components of length times width, exudate amount, and tissue type, is a valid and sensitive measure of pressure ulcer healing. It is a practical approach that provides clinically valid data regarding pressure ulcer healing. Further testing is needed to confirm these findings.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel's Updated Pressure Ulcer Staging System
Black, J., Baharestani, M. M., Cuddigan, J., Dorner, B., Edsberg, L., Langemo, D., Posthauer, M. E., Ratliff, C., & Taler, G. (2007) · Advances in Skin & Wound Care · doi:10.1097/01.asw.0000269314.23015.e9 · Cited by 375
Self-citationTreatment of Pressure Ulcers: A Systematic Review
Reddy, M., Gill, S. S., Kalkar, S. R., Wu, W., Anderson, P. J., & Rochon, P. A. (2008) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2008.778 · Cited by 266
Pereira, L., Figueiredo-Braga, M., & Carvalho, I. P. (2016) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/j.pec.2015.11.016 · Cited by 221
Metadata
- Authors
- Stotts, N. A., Rodeheaver, G. T., Thomas, D. R., Frantz, R. A., Bartolucci, A. A., Sussman, C., Ferrell, B. A., Cuddigan, J., & Maklebust, J.
- Venue
- The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2001-12-01
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- M795-M799
- ISSN
- 1079-5006 (ISSN-L)
- 1758-535X
- OpenAlex
- W2116099919
- Cited by
- 208
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An Instrument to Measure Healing in Pressure Ulcers: Development and Validation of the Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing (PUSH). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/gerona/56.12.m795
- The paper
- Stotts, N. A., Rodeheaver, G. T., Thomas, D. R., Frantz, R. A., Bartolucci, A. A., Sussman, C., Ferrell, B. A., Cuddigan, J., & Maklebust, J. (2001). An Instrument to Measure Healing in Pressure Ulcers: Development and Validation of the Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing (PUSH). The Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/56.12.m795
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.