4.4 Article

Prevalence of Pressure Ulcers in Hospitalized Patients in Germany in 2005: Data from the Federal Statistical Office

期刊

GERONTOLOGY
卷 55, 期 3, 页码 281-287

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000174825

关键词

Pressure ulcer; Prevalence; Diagnosis-related groups; Principal diagnosis; Epidemiology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Using the National Statistics ('DRG-Statistik') published by the Federal Statistical Office, we analyzed prevalences of pressure ulcers coded as principal or as additional diagnosis separately and describe differences in ulcer characteristics. Patients and Methods: Age-adjusted prevalence and tables for gender and age distribution of pressure ulcers separately for the principal diagnosis and for additional diagnoses were provided by the Federal Statistical Office. Results: In 2005, about 16 million patients were treated as full-time patients in German hospitals. 9,941 (0.06%) were referred with pressure ulcer as principal diagnosis and 191,040 (1.19%) had at least one additional diagnosis pressure ulcer. People >65 years of age had the highest risk for pressure ulcers (per 100,000 population principal diagnosis: females 52 and males 37; additional diagnosis: females 1,076 and males 947). Up to 80% of those who had the principal diagnosis pressure ulcer had ulcers grade 3 and 4, whereas 60% of the pressure ulcers documented as additional diagnosis were grade 1 and 2 (p < 0.001). The most frequent localizations of pressure ulcers were the ischium, the sacrum and the heel. In patients <65 years of age with the principal diagnosis pressure ulcer, the mortality rate is <0.1%. In the older age groups it increases gradually up to 10% in the 8th decade of life. Conclusion: Pressure ulcers are still a relevant problem in Germany. Although patients 65 years and older are at the highest risk, all age groups are affected. Younger people seem to struggle with different problems compared to older people. Copyright (C) 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据