Cited by 631Pressure Ulcer Prevention and ManagementWound Healing and TreatmentsHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

The national cost of hospital-acquired pressure injuries in the United States.

Open access
Padula, William V., Delarmente, Benjo A.·2019·International Wound Journal

Abstract

Our objective was to estimate the US national cost burden of hospital‐acquired pressure injury (HAPI) using economic simulation methods. We created a Markov simulation to estimate costs for staged pressure injuries acquired during hospitalisation from the hospital perspective. The model analysed outcomes of hospitalised adults with acute illness in 1‐day cycles until all patients were terminated at the point of discharge or death. Simulations that developed a staged pressure injury after 4 days could advance from Stages 1 to 4 and accrue additional costs for Stages 3 and 4. We measured costs in 2016 US dollars representing the total cost of acute care attributable to HAPI incidence at the patient level and for the entire United States based on the previously reported epidemiology of pressure injury. US HAPI costs could exceed $26.8 billion. About 59% of these costs are disproportionately attributable to a small rate of Stages 3 and 4 full‐thickness wounds, which occupy clinician time and hospital resources. HAPIs remain a concern with regard to hospital quality in addition to being a major source of economic burden on the US health care system. Hospitals should invest more in quality improvement of early detection and care for pressure injury to avoid higher costs.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/iwj.13071

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [15]15. Haesler E. Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers: Clinical Practice Guideline. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Media; 2014.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Padula, W. V., & Delarmente, B. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Padula, William V.
Venue
International Wound Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-01-28
Volume
16
Issue
3
Pages
634-640
ISSN
  • 1742-4801 (ISSN-L)
  • 1742-481X
OpenAlex
W2913345157
Cited by
631
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 91 · 2025: 126 · 2024: 107 · 2023: 117 · 2022: 81 · 2021: 59 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 7
FWCI
101.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Wound Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Pressure Ulcer Prevention and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Wound Healing and Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
hospital-acquired pressure injuries, economic burden, Markov model, full-thickness wounds, hospital costs, acute care, pressure ulcer prevention, hospital quality
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Pressure Ulcer, Female, Humans, Iatrogenic Disease, Male, Middle Aged, United States, Health Care Costs

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