Preventing Pressure Ulcers in Nursing Home Patients
This paper examines the clinical question of whether more frequent turning and repositioning of immobile nursing home patients reduces the risk of pressure ulcers. Focusing on a retrospective observational study by Rich et al. (2011) involving 269 elderly hip fracture patients across nine hospitals, the paper reviews the study's research design, sample selection, data collection methods, and key limitations. Notably, the study found no discernible difference in pressure ulcer incidence based on repositioning frequency, challenging the conventional 2-hour repositioning guideline. The paper concludes by discussing the broader implications for long-term care facilities and the need for further research to optimize nursing resource allocation.
- Introduction and Clinical Background: Cost and prevalence of pressure ulcers in nursing homes
- Research Question and Study Design: Optimal repositioning frequency as the guiding question
- Sample Selection and Data Collection: 269 elderly hip fracture patients; chart-based data
- Study Limitations and How to Overcome Them: Observational design limits; randomized trial preferred
- Findings and Reporting Methods: No difference found between repositioning frequencies
- Summary and Implications for Long-Term Care: Findings challenge 2-hour guideline; further research needed
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Clearly frames a focused clinical question — whether 2-hour versus 4-hour repositioning intervals reduce pressure ulcer incidence — and uses a single primary study to answer it systematically.
- Honestly engages with the counterintuitive finding that more frequent repositioning showed no measurable benefit, demonstrating intellectual integrity rather than cherry-picking supportive evidence.
- Connects study findings to broader public health and resource-allocation concerns, grounding the analysis in real cost and quality-of-life data.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates structured critical appraisal of a single empirical study — systematically walking through research design, sampling, data collection, limitations, and findings before drawing broader conclusions. This "study dissection" approach is a core skill in nursing and health sciences education, showing readers how to evaluate the validity and generalizability of clinical evidence.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with an introduction establishing the clinical and economic stakes of pressure ulcers, then moves sequentially through the research question, design, sample, data collection methods, limitations, and reported findings of the Rich et al. (2011) study. It closes with a summary section that extrapolates findings to nursing home populations and calls for guideline re-evaluation. Each section is clearly demarcated, making this an effective model for structured evidence-based practice writing at the undergraduate level.
Introduction and Clinical Background
With growing numbers of the American population joining the elderly ranks, there has been a corresponding increase in the number of residents of long-term care facilities, including approximately 16,100 nursing homes in recent years (Palumbo & McLaughlin, 2011). As a result, there has also been increased interest among clinicians concerning optimal turning and repositioning rates for immobile nursing home patients to reduce pressure ulcers (Miller & Ward, 2010). The need for improved care of pressure ulcers is great, and it has been estimated that the cost of each pressure ulcer incident ranges between $500 and $70,000, for a staggering total of $11 billion annually (Lilly & Estocada, 2014).
Therefore, the question of interest for this study is whether turning and repositioning a patient more frequently — that is, every 2 hours — reduces the risk of patients developing pressure ulcers compared with patients turned and repositioned less frequently — that is, every 4 hours. To develop an informed and timely answer to this question, this paper reviews a study by Rich, Margolis, Shardell et al. (2011) concerning optimal manual repositioning pressure ulcer prevention protocols for a population of immobilized hip fracture patients treated in tertiary healthcare facilities, followed by a summary of the research and important findings concerning these issues.
References
Lilly, D. & Estocada, N. (2014, December 1). Validation of the NE1 Wound Assessment Tool to improve staging of pressure ulcers on admission by registered nurses. Journal of Nursing Measurement, 22(3), 438–441.
Miller, L. L. & Ward, D. (2010, Spring). Evidence-based practices in nursing. Generations, 34(1), 72–77.
Palumbo, M. V. & McLaughlin, V. (2011, Winter). Practical nurses' health and safety in nursing homes. Journal of Health and Human Services Administration, 34(3), 271–277.
Peterson, M. J. & Gravenstein, N. (2013, April). Patient repositioning and pressure ulcer risk — monitoring interface pressures of at-risk patients. Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development, 50(4), 477–481.
Preventing pressure ulcers in hospitals. (2016). Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Retrieved from http://www.ahrq.gov/professionals/systems/hospital/pressureulcertoolkit/putool1.html
Rich, E. (Shayna), Margolis, D., Shardell, M. et al. (2011). Frequent manual repositioning and incidence of pressure ulcers among bed-bound elderly hip fracture patients. Wound Repair and Regeneration, 19, 10–18.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.