Adherence to ‘pressure-relief’ regimen for pressure ulcer (PrU) prevention in spinal cord injury (SCI)

Liu, Liang Q. and Chapman, Sarah and Deegan, Rachel and Allan, Helen T. and Traynor, Michael and Gall, Angela (2016) Adherence to ‘pressure-relief’ regimen for pressure ulcer (PrU) prevention in spinal cord injury (SCI). In: The 55th ISCoS Annual Scientific Meeting, 14-16 Sept 2016, Vienna, Austria.

Full text is not in this repository.


Objectives: 1) To explore whether people with SCI follow advice on ‘pressure-relief’; 2) to evaluate views on performing ‘pressure-relief’ for PrU prevention and identify barriers to following pressure-relief advice in SCI.

Method: Mixed methods pilot study. Wheelchair-users with SCI were recruited. A questionnaire was used to assess concordance to pressure-relief advice, perceived necessity, concerns and barriers to performing pressure-relief and perceptions of PrU. To explore patients’ views in-depth, semi-structured telephone interviews were carried out.

Results: 31 SCI aged 44.7yr±14.4 were surveyed. Average duration of injury was 16.7years±16.2, 58% experienced a PrU, 94% PrU were gluteal/sacral. Although most respondents (84%) performed pressure-relief daily, only 22% performed the amount recommended. Poor concordance to advice is illustrated by adherence score, 25±4.6 (maximum 35). Perceived Necessity score was low (1.7±0.6); Concerns about pressure-relief were high (4.1±0.8) indicating patients typically had concerns about potential negative events of pressure-relief. Practical barriers were also frequently reported (score was 3.5±0.7). Despite this, PrU were viewed as serious threatening as shown by the brief IPQ score of 64±9.3 (maximum 80). Five individuals participated in interviews. Analysis identified 4 themes: lack of knowledge and support, unawareness of impact of PrU soon after SCI, perceptions that pressure-relief is unnecessary, and practical barriers in tetraplegia.

Conclusion: We found poor concordance with pressure-relief advice in SCI. Lack of knowledge, doubts in the necessity of pressure-relief, concerns about the negative effects and practical barriers of performing pressure-relief could contribute. Future early education and tailored interventions are warranted for PrU prevention in this population.

Item Type: Conference or Workshop Item (Poster)
Research Areas: A. > School of Health and Education > Adult, Child and Midwifery
Item ID: 20202
Useful Links:
Depositing User: Liang Liu
Date Deposited: 18 Jul 2016 10:31
Last Modified: 14 Sep 2017 11:33

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item