Cited by 11Pressure Ulcer Prevention and ManagementElectronic Health Records SystemsNursing Diagnosis and Documentation

E-Health Decision Support Technologies in the Prevention and Management of Pressure Ulcers: A Systematic Review

Ting, Justine Jeanelle, Garnett, Anna·2021·CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing

Abstract

Pressure ulcers are problematic across clinical settings, negatively impacting patient morbidity and mortality while resulting in substantial costs to the healthcare system. E-health clinical decision support technologies can play a key role in improving pressure ulcer-related outcomes. This systematic review aimed to assess the impact of electronic health decision support interventions on pressure ulcer management and prevention. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane. Nineteen articles, published from 2010 to 2020, were included for review. The findings of this review showed promising results regarding the usability and accuracy of electronic health decision support tools to aid in pressure ulcer prevention and management. Evidence indicated improved clinician adherence to pressure ulcer prevention practices and decreased healthcare costs postimplementation of an electronic health decision support intervention. However, the studies included in this review did not consistently show reductions in pressure ulcer prevalence, incidence, or risk. Most of the articles included in the review were limited by small sample sizes drawn from single hospitals or long-term care homes. More high-quality studies are needed to determine the types of electronic health decision support tools that can drive sustainable improvements to patient outcomes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/cin.0000000000000780

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • ML identification of patients with a high risk of pressure ulcers or falls can trigger CDS for nursing interventions.

    “For example, ML identification of patients with a high risk of pressure ulcers51,52 or falls53 can trigger CDS for nursing interventions.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ting, J. J., & Garnett, A.
Affiliations
Western University (CA)
Venue
CIN: Computers, Informatics, Nursing
Published
2021-06-16
Volume
39
Issue
12
Pages
955-973
ISSN
  • 1538-2931 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-9774
OpenAlex
W3167390333
Cited by
11
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1
FWCI
0.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • CIN Computers Informatics Nursing (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Pressure Ulcer Prevention and Management
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Issues, ethics and legal aspects › Nursing Diagnosis and Documentation
Keywords
pressure ulcers, clinical decision support systems, pressure ulcer prevention, pressure ulcer treatment, clinician adherence, health care costs, usability, long-term care facilities
MeSH terms
Pressure Ulcer, Humans, Long-Term Care, Telemedicine, Decision Support Systems, Clinical

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