The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Reliability of the European pressure ulcer advisory panel classification system

Reliability of the European pressure ulcer advisory panel classification system
Reliability of the European pressure ulcer advisory panel classification system
Aim. This paper reports a study examining the interrater and intrarater reliability of
classifying pressure ulcers according to the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel
classification system when using photographs of pressure ulcers and incontinence
lesions.
Background. Pressure ulcer classification is an essential tool for assessing ulcers and
their severity and determining which preventive or therapeutic action is needed.
Many classification systems are described in the literature. There are only a limited
number of studies that evaluate the interrater reliability of pressure ulcer grading
scales. The intrarater reliability is seldom studied.
Methods. The study consisted of two phases. In the first phase 56 photographs,
together with a random selection of nine photographs from the same set, were presented
to 473 nurses. In the second phase, the 56 photographs were presented twice
to 86 other nurses with an interval of one month and in a different order. All the
nurses were familiar with the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel classification.
They did not receive any additional training on classification, and were asked to
classify the lesions as normal skin, blanchable erythema, pressure ulcers (four grades,
European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel classification) or incontinence lesions.Results. In the first phase, the multirater-Kappa for the 473 participating nurses was
0.37 (P < 0.001). Non-blanchable erythema was often confused with blanchable
erythema and incontinence lesions. Also incontinence lesions were frequently not
correctly classified. The intrarater agreement was low (k = 0.38). In the second
phase, the interrater agreement was not significantly different in both sessions. The
intrarater agreement was 0.52.Conclusion. Both the interrater and intrarater reliability of the European Pressure
Ulcer Advisory Panel classification of lesion photographs by nurses was very low.
Differentiation between pressure ulcers and incontinence lesions seems to be difficult
0309-2402
189-198
Defloor, T.
4ca437de-5cb1-4d24-91d7-a388ee5839f2
Schoonhoven, Lisette
46a2705b-c657-409b-b9da-329d5b1b02de
Katrien, V.
6dc516d4-63fd-4751-8922-36ac1b4092ad
Weststrate, J.
7d95bb66-ed1a-40ec-b31a-34599e31bdf3
Myny, D.
a7aee596-2b72-48a2-9e89-769b57344017
Defloor, T.
4ca437de-5cb1-4d24-91d7-a388ee5839f2
Schoonhoven, Lisette
46a2705b-c657-409b-b9da-329d5b1b02de
Katrien, V.
6dc516d4-63fd-4751-8922-36ac1b4092ad
Weststrate, J.
7d95bb66-ed1a-40ec-b31a-34599e31bdf3
Myny, D.
a7aee596-2b72-48a2-9e89-769b57344017

Defloor, T., Schoonhoven, Lisette, Katrien, V., Weststrate, J. and Myny, D. (2006) Reliability of the European pressure ulcer advisory panel classification system. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 54 (2), 189-198. (doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03801.x). (PMID:16553705)

Record type: Article

Abstract

Aim. This paper reports a study examining the interrater and intrarater reliability of
classifying pressure ulcers according to the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel
classification system when using photographs of pressure ulcers and incontinence
lesions.
Background. Pressure ulcer classification is an essential tool for assessing ulcers and
their severity and determining which preventive or therapeutic action is needed.
Many classification systems are described in the literature. There are only a limited
number of studies that evaluate the interrater reliability of pressure ulcer grading
scales. The intrarater reliability is seldom studied.
Methods. The study consisted of two phases. In the first phase 56 photographs,
together with a random selection of nine photographs from the same set, were presented
to 473 nurses. In the second phase, the 56 photographs were presented twice
to 86 other nurses with an interval of one month and in a different order. All the
nurses were familiar with the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel classification.
They did not receive any additional training on classification, and were asked to
classify the lesions as normal skin, blanchable erythema, pressure ulcers (four grades,
European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel classification) or incontinence lesions.Results. In the first phase, the multirater-Kappa for the 473 participating nurses was
0.37 (P < 0.001). Non-blanchable erythema was often confused with blanchable
erythema and incontinence lesions. Also incontinence lesions were frequently not
correctly classified. The intrarater agreement was low (k = 0.38). In the second
phase, the interrater agreement was not significantly different in both sessions. The
intrarater agreement was 0.52.Conclusion. Both the interrater and intrarater reliability of the European Pressure
Ulcer Advisory Panel classification of lesion photographs by nurses was very low.
Differentiation between pressure ulcers and incontinence lesions seems to be difficult

Text
Defloor_et_al_Reliability_of_European_PU_advisory_panel_classification_system.pdf - Other
Restricted to Repository staff only
Request a copy

More information

Published date: April 2006
Organisations: Faculty of Health Sciences

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 339743
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/339743
ISSN: 0309-2402
PURE UUID: d561665f-4433-425d-a277-8e02de7db2ce
ORCID for Lisette Schoonhoven: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-7129-3766

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 30 May 2012 10:10
Last modified: 07 Oct 2020 05:53

Export record

Altmetrics

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×