Alcance de la implantación de la guía “valoración del riesgo y prevención de úlceras por presión de la 'Registered Nurses’ Association of Ontario (RNAO)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolFundamentos: El Programa Centros Comprometidos con la Excelencia en Cuidados®, se desarrolla en Espana, para reducir la variabilidad de la practica clinica, implantando guias de practica clinica de la Registered Nurses’ Association of Ontario. Este estudio describio los resultados de la implantacion de la guia “Valoracion del riesgo y prevencion de las ulceras por presion”. Metodos: Se realizo un estudio observacional retrospectivo (2015-2018) en el Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves sobre 4.464 pacientes de 22 unidades de hospitalizacion, analizando el tipo de unidad, la valoracion del riesgo, las medidas preventivas, la procedencia y la categoria de las ulceras. Se realizo analisis descriptivo y tablas de contingencia con el estadistico Chicuadrado p Resultados: Los pacientes de riesgo fueron el 62,2% en unidades medicas, 53,4% en las quirurgicas y el 90% en cuidados intensivos. La aplicacion de medidas preventivas fue del 67,9%, 60,2% y 92,1% (respectivamente) para cada unidad. En unidades medicas se identificaron un 13,1% de ulceras por presion, de las cuales el 68,1% estaban presentes en el momento del ingreso. Mientras que en unidades quirurgicas y en cuidados intensivos se desarrollaron durante la hospitalizacion (60,8% y 88,9% respectivamente) (p Conclusiones: Existen entornos favorecedores para la implantacion (unidades medicas y cuidados intensivos) que reflejan mayor nivel de valoracion del riesgo, de utilizacion de superficies de gestion de la presion y disminucion de la prevalencia. No se ha conseguido implantar las recomendaciones de forma homogenea existiendo diferencias en funcion del tipo de unidad. EnglishBackground: The Best Practice Spotlight Organizations® Program is being developed in Spain to reduce the variability of clinical practice by implementing clinical practice guidelines from the Registered Nurses’ Association of Ontario. This study described the results of the implementation of the guide “Risk assessment and prevention of pressure ulcers”. Methods: We carried out a retrospective observational study (2015-2018) at the Hospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves on 4,464 patients from 22 hospitalization units, analyzing type of unit, risk assessment, preventive measures, origin and category of ulcers. Descriptive analysis and contingency tables were performed with the Chisquare statistic p Results: The patients at risk were 62.2% in medical units, 53.4% in surgical units and 90% in intensive care. The application of preventive measures was 67.9%, 60.2% and 92.1% (respectively) for each unit. In medical units, 13.1% of pressure ulcers were identified, of which 68.1% were present at the time of admission. While in surgical units and intensive care they developed during hospitalization (60.8% and 88.9% respectively) (p The presence of ulcers seemed to show a decreasing trend in the years analyzed (19.6% to 11.2%). Conclusions: There are favorable environments for implantation (medical units and intensive care) that reflect a higher level of risk assessment, use of pressure management surfaces and a decrease in prevalence. The recommendations have not been implemented homogeneously, with differences depending on the type of unit.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it