Volume 3, Issue 3 ( Journal of Clinical and Basic Research (JCBR) 2019)
jcbr 2019, 3(3): 18-24 |
Back to browse issues page
Ali Baradaran Bagheri1 
, Leila Sadati * 2, Alireza Beyrami2 , Sajad Fatollahi3 , Zahra Nouri Khanegah2 , Hojjat Torkamandi2
, Leila Sadati * 2, Alireza Beyrami2 , Sajad Fatollahi3 , Zahra Nouri Khanegah2 , Hojjat Torkamandi2
1- Department of Neurosurgery, School of Medicine, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran
2- Operating Room Department, Faculty of Paramedicie, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran
3- Imam Khomeyni Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2- Operating Room Department, Faculty of Paramedicie, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran
3- Imam Khomeyni Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Abstract: (4416 Views)
Background and objectives: One of the adverse effects of prone positioning in spine surgery is the occurrence of skin damage. Due to the high rate of spine surgeries and the frequent use of prone positioning during these procedures, we aimed to investigate postoperative skin complications after spine surgery in the prone position.
Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was performed in 2016-2017 on 160 patients undergoing spine surgery in the prone position at a teaching hospital in Tehran, Iran. The patients' body parts were examined for presence any redness, ecchymosis and pressure ulcers before discharge from the hospital. Collected data were analyzed in SPSS software (version 19) using descriptive statistics, Chi-square test, Mann–Whitney U test and Kendall's correlation coefficient.
Results: Almost all patients had skin damage, especially redness, in the postoperative stage. Age, gender, duration of surgery, height, weight and body mass index were significantly associated with incidence of skin damage (P<0.05).
Conclusion: Our results indicated that the incidence of postoperative skin damage is relatively high in patients undergoing spine surgery in the prone position. Therefore, it is recommended to take appropriate precautions in order to prevent these complications.
Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study was performed in 2016-2017 on 160 patients undergoing spine surgery in the prone position at a teaching hospital in Tehran, Iran. The patients' body parts were examined for presence any redness, ecchymosis and pressure ulcers before discharge from the hospital. Collected data were analyzed in SPSS software (version 19) using descriptive statistics, Chi-square test, Mann–Whitney U test and Kendall's correlation coefficient.
Results: Almost all patients had skin damage, especially redness, in the postoperative stage. Age, gender, duration of surgery, height, weight and body mass index were significantly associated with incidence of skin damage (P<0.05).
Conclusion: Our results indicated that the incidence of postoperative skin damage is relatively high in patients undergoing spine surgery in the prone position. Therefore, it is recommended to take appropriate precautions in order to prevent these complications.
References
1. Landi A, Corradetti E, Mancarella C, R D. Prevention of complications related to patient prone positioning during spinal neurosurgical care: a nursing point of view. J Neurosurg Spine. 2013;2:2-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
2. Phillips N. Berry & Kohn's operating room technique: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2016. [Google Scholar]
3. Oglesby M, Fineberg SJ, Patel AA, Pelton MA, Singh K. Epidemiological trends in cervical spine surgery for degenerative diseases between 2002 and 2009. Spine.2013;38:1226-32. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
4. Benzel EC. Spine Surgery 2-Vol Set E-Book: Techniques, Complication Avoidance, and Management (Expert Consult-Online): Elsevier Health Sciences; 2012. [Google Scholar]
5. O'Connell MP. Positioning impact on the surgical patient. Nurs Clin N Am.2006;41:173-92. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
6. DePasse JM, Palumbo MA, Haque M, Eberson CP, Daniels AH. Complications associated with prone positioning in elective spinal surgery. World journal of orthopedics. 2015;6(3):351. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
7. Shriver MF, Zeer V, Alentado VJ, Mroz TE, Benzel EC, Steinmetz MP. Lumbar spine surgery positioning complications: a systematic review. Neurosurgical focus. 2015;39(4):E16. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
8. Fu Shaw L, Chang P-C, Lee J-F, Kung H-Y, Tung T-H. Incidence and predicted risk factors of pressure ulcers in surgical patients: experience at a medical center in Taipei, Taiwan. BioMed research international. 2014;2014. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
9. Scott SM. Progress and challenges in perioperative pressure ulcer prevention. Journal of Wound Ostomy & Continence Nursing. 2015;42(5):480-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
10. Kamel I, Barnette R. Positioning patients for spine surgery: Avoiding uncommon position-related complications. World J Orthop.2014;5:425. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
11. Nickels TJ, Manlapaz MR, Farag E. Perioperative visual loss after spine surgery. World J Orthop.2014;5:100. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
12. Engels D, Austin M, McNichol L, Fencl J, Gupta S, Kazi H. Pressure ulcers: factors contributing to their development in the OR. AORN j.2016;103:271-81. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
13. Kumta N, Coyer F, David M. Perioperative factors and pressure ulcer development in postoperative ICU patients: a retrospective review. J Wound Care.2018;27:475-85. [DOI:10.12968/jowc.2018.27.8.475] [Google Scholar]
14. Webster J, Lister C, Corry J, Holland M, Coleman K, Marquart L. Incidence and Risk Factors for Surgically Acquired Pressure Ulcers. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs.2015;42:138-44. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
15. Cox J. Pressure ulcer development and vasopressor agents in adult critical care patients: a literature review. Ostomy Wound Manage.2013;59:50-4. [Google Scholar]
16. Cox J. Predictors of pressure ulcers in adult critical care patients. Am J Crit Care.2011;20:364-75. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
17. Lewicki LJ, Mion L, Splane KG, Samstag D, Secic M. Patient risk factors for pressure ulcers during cardiac surgery. AORN j.1997;65:933-42. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
18. Schoonhoven L, Defloor T, van der Tweel I, Buskens E, Grypdonck MH. Risk indicators for pressure ulcers during surgery. Appl Nurs Res.2002;15:163-73. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
19. Slowikowski GC, Funk M. Factors associated with pressure ulcers in patients in a surgical intensive care unit. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs.2010;37:619-26. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
20. Schouchoff B. Pressure ulcer development in the operating room. Crit Care Nurs Q.2002;25:76-82. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
21. Bulfone G, Marzoli I, Quattrin R, Fabbro C, Palese A. A longitudinal study of the incidence of pressure sores and the associated risks and strategies adopted in Italian operating theatres. J Perioper Pract.2012;22:50-6,. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
22. Dunn D. Preventing perioperative complications in an older adult. Nursing.2004;34:36-41. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
23. Dunn D. Age-smart care: Preventing peri operative complications in older adults. Nursing made Incredibly Easy.2006;4:30-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
24. Fletcher K, Hawkes P, Williams-Rosenthal S, Mariscal CS, Cox BA. Using nurse practitioners to implement best practice care for the elderly during hospitalization: the NICHE journey at the University of Virginia Medical Center. Crit Care Nurs Clin North Am.2017;19:321-37. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
25. O'brien DD, Shanks AM, Talsma A, Brenner PS, Ramachandran SK. Intraoperative risk factors associated with postoperative pressure ulcers in critically ill patients: a retrospective observational study. Crit Care Med.2014;42:40-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
26. Westhead C. Perioperative nursing management of the elderly patient. ORNAC J.25:34,2007. [Google Scholar]
27. Cherry C, Moss J. Best practices for preventing hospital-acquired pressure injuries in surgical patients. ACORN.2011;24:16-21. [Google Scholar]
28. Walton-Geer PS. Prevention of pressure ulcers in the surgical patient. AORN j.2009;89:538-52. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
29. Bergstrom N, Braden B, Kemp M, Champagne M, Ruby E. Predicting pressure ulcer risk: a multisite study of the predictive validity of the Braden Scale. Nurs Res.1998;47:261-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
30. Pokorny ME, Koldjeski D, Swanson M. Skin care intervention for patients having cardiac surgery. Am J Crit Care.2003;12:535-44. [Google Scholar]
31. Azzi L, El-Alfy M, Martel C, Labrie F. Gender differences in mouse skin morphology and specific effects of sex steroids and dehydroepiandrosterone. J Invest Dermatol.2005;124:22-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
32. Giacomoni PU, Mammone T, Teri M. Gender-linked differences in human skin. J Dermatol Sci.2009;55:144-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
33. Wabnitz PA, Bowie JH, Tyler MJ, Wallace JC, Smith BP. Differences in the skin peptides of the male and female Australian tree frog Litoria splendida: the discovery of the aquatic male sex pheromone splendipherin, together with Phe8 caerulein and a new antibiotic peptide caerin 1.10. Eur J Biochem.2000;267:269-75. [DOI] [ISI]
34. Burlingame BL. Guideline Implementation: Positioning the Patient. AORN J.2017;106:227-37. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |