How accurate are pressure ulcer grades? An image-based survey of nurse performance

Accuracy of ultrasound, thermography and subepidermal moisture in predicting pressure ulcers: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Our aims were to: establish the clinical significance of ultrasound, thermography, photography and subepidermal moisture (SEM) measurement; determine the accuracy of ultrasound, thermography, photography and SEM measurement in detecting skin/tissue damage; determine the relative accuracy of one of these assessment methods over another; make recommendations for practice pertaining to assessment of early skin/tissue damage.

METHOD

The following databases, Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Elsevier version, EBSCO CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov , WHO International Clinical Trials Registry (ICTR) and The EU Clinical Trials Register were searched for terms including; thermography, ultrasound, subepidermal moisture, photograph and pressure ulcer.

RESULTS

We identified four SEM, one thermography and five ultrasound studies for inclusion in this review. Data analysis indicated that photography was not a method which allowed for the early prediction of PU presence. SEM values increased with increasing tissue damage, with the sacrum and the heels being the most common anatomical locations for the development of erythema and stage I PUs. Thermography identified temperature changes in tissues and skin that may give an indication of early PU development; however the data were not sufficiently robust. Ultrasound detected pockets of fluid/oedema at different levels of the skin that were comparable with tissue damage. Thus, SEM and ultrasound were the best methods for allowing a more accurate assessment of early skin/tissue damage. Using the EBL Critical Appraisal Tool the overall validities of the studies varied between 33.3-55.6%, meaning that there is potential for bias within all the included studies. All of the studies were situated at level IV, V and VII of the evidence pyramid. Although the methodological quality of the studies warrants consideration, these studies showed the potential that SEM and ultrasound have in early PU detection.

CONCLUSION

SEM and ultrasound are promising in the detection and prediction of early tissue damage and PU presence. However, these methods should be further studied to clarify their potential for use more widely in PU prevention strategies.

Inter-rater reliability of the Reaper Oral Mucosa Pressure Injury Scale (ROMPIS): A novel scale for the assessment of the severity of pressure injuries to the mouth and oral mucosa

BACKGROUND

Patients who are intubated in the ICU are at risk of developing pressure injuries to the mouth and lips from endotracheal tubes. Clear documentation is important for pressure wound care; however, no validated instruments currently exist for the staging of pressure injuries to the oral mucosa. Instruments designed for the assessment of pressure injuries to other bodily regions are anatomically unsuited to the lips and mouth.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to develop and then assess the reliability of a novel scale for the assessment of pressure injuries to the mouth and oral mucosa.

METHODS

The Reaper Oral Mucosa Pressure Injury Scale (ROMPIS) was developed in consultation with ICU nurses, clinical nurse educators, Intensivists, and experts in pressure wound management. ICU nurses and portfolio-holders in pressure wound care from Peninsula Health (Victoria, Australia) were invited to use the ROMPIS to stage 19 de-identified clinical photographs of oral pressure injuries via secure online survey. Inter-rater reliability (IRR) was calculated using Krippendorff's alpha (α).

RESULTS

Among ICU nurses (n=52), IRR of the ROMPIS was α=0.307; improving to α=0.463 when considering only responses where injuries were deemed to be stageable using the ROMPIS (i.e. excluding responses where respondents considered an injury to be unstageable). Among a cohort of experts in pressure wound care (n=8), IRR was α=0.306; or α=0.443 excluding responses indicating that wounds were unstageable.

CONCLUSIONS

An instrument for the assessment and monitoring of pressure injuries to the mouth and lips has practical implications for patient care. This preliminary study indicates that the ROMPIS instrument has potential to be used clinically for this purpose; however, the performance of this scale may be somewhat reliant on the confidence or experience of the ICU nurse utilising it. Further validation is required.

Validity of pressure ulcer diagnosis using digital photography

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity of digital photographs for the assessment of the presence of pressure ulcers stage 2 or higher. Participants were 48 patients (28 white and 20 black) with pressure ulcers identified in the course of a wound specialist's routine clinical practice at the University of Maryland Medical Center. One pressure ulcer and one unaffected skin area were photographed on each participating patient. The gold standard diagnosis (stage 2 pressure ulcer vs. stage 1 or no pressure ulcer) was recorded by the wound specialist based on bedside examination. The photographs were reviewed blindly by another wound expert. The sensitivity of the blinded assessment was 97% (95% confidence interval [CI] 91-100%). The specificity was 97% (95% CI 92-100%). The sensitivity and specificity were both 100% in the white patients. In black patients, the sensitivity and specificity were 92% (95% CI 75-100%) and 93% (95% CI 82-100%), respectively. These results suggest that the use of photographic images to assess the presence or absence of a pressure ulcer stage 2 or higher has a high degree of validity. Since blinded outcome assessment is one of the cornerstones of good clinical trial design, photography offers the potential to strengthen future studies.

Pressure ulcer prevention in intensive care patients: guidelines and practice

BACKGROUND

Pressure ulcers are a potential problem in intensive care patients, and their prevention is a major issue in nursing care. This study aims to assess the allocation of preventive measures for patients at risk for pressure ulcers in intensive care and the evidence of applied pressure ulcer preventive measures in intensive care settings in respect to the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (EPUAP) and Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR) guidelines for pressure ulcer prevention.

DESIGN

The design of this study was a cross-sectional study (point prevalence). Setting The study setting was intensive care units. The sample consisted of 169 patients - 60 patients from surgical wards, 59 from interdisciplinary wards and 50 from medical intensive care wards.

RESULTS

The study results revealed that pressure reducing devices like mattresses (alternating pressure air, low air loss and foam) are applied for 58 (36.5%) patients, and all of these patients are at risk for pressure ulcer development. Most patients receive more than one nursing intervention, especially patients at risk. Nursing interventions applied are skin inspection, massage with moisture cream, nutrition and mobility (81.8%, 80.5%, 68.6% and 56.6%) respectively. Moreover, all applied pressure ulcer preventive measures in this study are in line with the guidelines of the EPUAP and AHCPR except massage which is applied to 8.8% of all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of pressure reducing devices and nursing interventions in intensive care patients are in line with international pressure ulcer guidelines. Only massage, which is also being used, should be avoided according to the recommendation of national and international guidelines.

Explaining the national differences in pressure ulcer prevalence between the Netherlands and Germany--adjusted for personal risk factors and institutional quality indicators

BACKGROUND

Pressure ulcers have a known impact on quality of life as well as on morbidity and mortality of the persons affected. Remarkable differences in pressure ulcer prevalence between the Netherlands and Germany have been found during the last 6 years. This study explores to what extent the individual risk of the population and quality indicators of the institutions can explain the variation in national prevalence.

METHODS

Data of a binational multi-centred cross-sectional study in 103 hospitals (n = 21,378 patients) and 129 nursing homes (n = 15,579 residents) were analysed using random effects regression models to calculate the differences in national prevalences within the nursing homes and hospitals, adjusted for personal risk for pressure ulcer and quality indicators.

RESULTS

The prevalence of pressure ulcers among the at-risk group (Bradenscore <or=20) in nursing homes was 30.8% in the Netherlands and 8.3% in Germany [OR: 4.9 (CI 95%: 4.2-5.7)]. In hospitals, the prevalence among the at-risk group was 26.1% in the Netherlands and 21.2% in Germany [OR: 1.3 (CI 95%: 1.2-1.5)]. After adjusting for individual risk factors (age, gender, Bradenscore) as well as for quality structures (use of prevention and treatment protocols, experts groups, information leaflets, nurses training, central pressure ulcer statistics and regular updating of protocols), the chance of developing a pressure ulcer was 6.05 times higher (CI 95%: 4.0-9.2) in a Dutch nursing home than in a German nursing home. Within the hospitals, the OR for Dutch patients was 2.03 (CI 95%: 1.4-3.0).

CONCLUSION

A remarkable national variation exists in pressure ulcer prevalence and nursing practice. Neither the populations vulnerability for pressure ulcers nor pressure ulcer management as measured in this study could explain this national variation. Therefore, other risk factors should be taken into consideration. Additionally, it is possible that quality indicators are implemented in differing ways with varying levels of effectiveness. Therefore, further research is needed to examine prospectively and in more detail the reality of care within facilities in both countries.

Differences in prevalence of pressure ulcers between the Netherlands and Germany--associations between risk, prevention and occurrence of pressure ulcers in hospitals and nursing homes

AIM

This study compares pressure ulcer prevalence and prevention activities in nursing homes and hospitals within two European countries. Background. Over three years stable differences have been found between the Netherlands (NL) and Germany (GER) with higher pressure ulcer rates in the NL. As previous analyses have shown, the differences cannot be entirely explained by differences in the population's vulnerability to pressure ulcers because they still remain after risk adjustment. Therefore, the differences in prevalence must be caused by other factors. The purpose of this study is to analyse if any potential differences in preventive activities can account for the varying occurrence of pressure ulcers.

METHOD

In both countries, nation-wide surveys were conducted annually using the same standardised questionnaires. Trained nurses examined all consenting patients of the voluntarily participating facilities. This examination included a skin assessment of the entire body. Data regarding risk factors, prevention and details about wounds were then collected.

RESULTS

In-patients of 29 German (n = 2531) and 71 Dutch (n = 10,098) nursing homes and 39 German (n = 8515) and 60 Dutch (n = 10,237) hospitals were investigated. The use of pressure-reducing devices was more common in the NL than in GER, but all other interventions were more frequently provided to German risk patients than to their Dutch counterparts. The pressure ulcer prevalence was significantly higher in the Dutch sample. After adjusting for gender, age, Braden Score and prevention, the probability of having a pressure ulcer was 8.1 times higher for Dutch nursing home residents than for German residents.

CONCLUSION

Some of the variance in pressure ulcer prevalence between the two countries can be explained by varying pressure ulcer prevention. However, some remarkable differences still remain unexplained.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The extent of pressure ulcer prevention, especially repositioning and nutrition intervention provided to patients at risk, is not in accordance with international guidelines.

Reliability and validity of pressure ulcer diagnosis and grading: An image-based survey

BACKGROUND

The reliability and validity of pressure ulcer diagnosis and grading are major methodological issues in studies and reports on pressure ulcer frequency.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to estimate the reliability and validity of pressure ulcer diagnosis and grading within the interdisciplinary pressure ulcer project of the University Clinics of Essen, Germany.

DESIGN

Fifty images of wounds from the foot/heel region and 50 images of wounds from the buttock/hip region were classified using a 4-grade scale. A gold standard was established by consensus of two senior physicians.

SETTINGS

The images were assessed PC-based, independently by each rater.

PARTICIPANTS

Five nursing experts and two physicians participated.

METHODS

Mean simple Kappa and per cent agreement were calculated to assess reliability and validity.

RESULTS

Mean simple Kappa values showed a moderate interrater agreement for grading and a fair interrater agreement for diagnosis. The percentage of agreements was highest for pressure ulcer diagnosis in the buttock/hip region with 90.5% and lowest for pressure ulcer grading in the buttock/hip region with 63.5%. No differences could be found between nurses and physicians.

CONCLUSIONS

The differentiation between pressure ulcers and other skin lesions is rather difficult. It is important to assign the lower grade when the available information does not definitely support the higher grade. The level of agreement found was intermediate in the range of published results. A substantial level of agreement should be obtainable through further standardisation and training. Future studies should control for dependency in the assessment situation and dispense with the category "uncertain".

Use of photographs for the identification of pressure ulcers in elderly hospitalized patients: validity and reliability

To evaluate the ability of research nurses to identify pressure ulcers, the authors assembled digital photographs of the skin of 160 consenting elderly patients (80% African American, 63% women). The series included 39 photos of pressure ulcers, 109 of normal skin, and 12 of other skin conditions, determined by consensus by two experts (D.J.M. and S.H.K.). Photos were packaged electronically into eight blocks of 20, with pressure ulcer prevalence ranging from 20% to 30% per block. The eight blocks were duplicated to create two sets of 160 photos each. Each of six raters (experienced clinical research nurses), working independently, evaluated the 320 photos as if each photo depicted a different patient. For analysis, the ratings were collapsed into binary determinations (any pressure ulcer vs. none). The overall sensitivity and specificity of the ratings were 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.94, 0.98) and 0.81 (95% confidence interval: 0.77, 0.86), respectively. Rater-specific prevalence (range: 31.8-47.5%) exceeded the true prevalence (24.4%). Inter- and intrarater reliability coefficients were 0.69 and 0.84, respectively. Trained research nurses can accurately classify pressure ulcers from photographs, even when patients are largely non-White and the photographs depict pressure ulcers spanning all pressure ulcer stages.

The reliability of two observation methods of nonblanchable erythema, Grade 1 pressure ulcer

Accurate identification of nonblanchable erythema (NBE) is essential in pressure ulcer prevention. This descriptive study assessed interrater reliability between a researcher and trained nurses in observing blanchable erythema and NBE and examined the predictive validity and level of agreement between two observation methods for NBE. Findings suggest that the transparent disk method should be preferred to the finger method. The interrater reliability between the researcher and the nurses was substantial and was higher for the observations at the sacrum than for those at the heels. Educational level and years of nursing experience did not seem to influence interrater reliability.

Reliability Testing of the National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators Pressure Ulcer Indicator

A criterion-referenced Web-based test was designed and administered to 256 individuals at 48 randomly sampled National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators (NDNQI) member hospitals to determine the reliability of the NDNQI pressure ulcer indicator. Overall kappa values for pressure ulcer identification, staging, and sourcing indicate moderate to near perfect reliability. Findings suggest that nurses can accurately differentiate pressure ulcers from other ulcerous wounds in Web-based photographs, reliably stage pressure ulcers, and reliably identify community versus nosocomial pressure ulcers.

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 (kappa = 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.

A comparison of pressure ulcer prevalence rates in nursing homes in the Netherlands and Germany, adjusted for population characteristics

Annual pressure ulcer surveys in the Netherlands and Germany have shown remarkable differences in prevalence rates. We explored the differences between the two populations, and the degree to which these differences were associated with differences in prevalence. To this end, data from 48 Dutch and 45 German facilities (n = 9772) from 2003 were analyzed. The prevalence of pressure ulcers (excluding grade 1) was 12.5% in the Netherlands and 4.3% in Germany. After adjusting for age, sex, and other risk factors, the probability of developing a pressure ulcer of stage 2 or higher in Dutch nursing homes was three times greater than in German homes.

Implementation of a new policy results in a decrease of pressure ulcer frequency

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effects of a new policy on the efficiency of pressure ulcer care.

DESIGN

Series of 1-day pressure ulcer surveys before and after the implementation.

SETTING

A 900-bed University Medical Centre in The Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

On the days of the surveys, 657 patients were included before the implementation, 735 patients at 4 months after the implementation, and 755 patients at 11 months after the implementation.

INTERVENTION

Implementation of a hospital guideline for pressure ulcer care combined with the introduction of viscoelastic foam mattresses on the efficiency of the prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Comparisons before versus after the implementation were made regarding the care behaviour of nurses and the frequency of patients with pressure ulcer.

RESULTS

Inadequate prevention decreased from 19 to 4% after 4 months and to 6% after 11 months (P < 0.001), and inadequate treatment decreased from 60 to 31% (P = 0.005). Excluding the use of mattresses as a positive indicator for care behaviour, we found no significant increase in adequate care to prevent pressure ulcers. Also, in adequate treatment activities, we found no significant difference. Overall, we found a significant decrease in hospital-acquired pressure ulcer frequency from 18 to 13% (P = 0.003) after 4 months and 11% (P < 0.001) after 11 months.

CONCLUSION

The number of pressure ulcer patients in hospital can successfully be reduced. General measures such as the introduction of adequate mattresses and guidelines for prevention and treatment are promising tools in this respect.

Reliability of pressure ulcer classification and diagnosis

AIM

To assess the inter-rater reliability of the PRESSURE Trial pressure ulcer diagnosis (>/=Grade 2) and skin classification for all grades between the clinical research nurse (CRN) team leader and CRNs working across different hospital sites; and CRNs and ward-based nurses.

BACKGROUND

The United Kingdom National Health Service Health Technology Assessment Programme has funded a multi-centre, randomized controlled trial to compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of alternating pressure mattress overlays and mattress replacements - PRESSURE Trial. Outcome skin assessments were recorded by qualified ward-based nurses daily, and expert CRNs twice weekly.

METHOD

Paired assessments were undertaken and skin assessed on seven body sites. The per cent agreement between nurses in the diagnosis of a pressure ulcer was determined and the Kappa statistic and confidence intervals calculated. Per cent agreement between nurses in classifying skin for all grades was also determined.

RESULTS

Assessments were undertaken by 378 pairs: 16 paired patient assessments (107 site comparisons) by the CRN team leader and CRNs, and 362 paired patient assessments (2396 site comparisons) between CRNs and ward-based nurses. There was 100% agreement between the CRN team leader and CRNs in the diagnosis of a pressure ulcer, and the Kappa statistics indicated 'very good' agreement. There were only two (1.9%) disagreements in classifying skin for all grades between these nurses. The agreement in the diagnosis of a pressure ulcer between CRNs and ward-based nurses varied by skin site, ranging from 93.6% to 100%, with the Kappa statistics indicating 'good' and 'very good' agreement. However, there were 508 (21.2%) disagreements in classifying skin for all grades.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall agreement and Kappa statistics indicated 'very good' and 'good' agreement between expert nurses, and between expert nurses and qualified ward-based staff, respectively. However, the high prevalence of normal skin concealed clinically important disagreements in both the diagnosis of pressure ulcers and skin classification for all grades.

Comparison of pressure ulcer grading scales: a study of clinical utility and inter-rater reliability

Pressure ulcer grading scales are subjective measures of pressure damage. This study measured inter-observer agreement of the Stirling scale (1-digit and 2-digit versions) and the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel Scale, using Cohen's kappa and percentage agreement. Clinical utility was also assessed. Thirty-five observations were made by two Registered Nurses on 30 adult in-patients. The levels of agreement obtained were better than those reported previously and this may be related to the methodology used. The 2-digit Stirling scale gave the best level of chance corrected agreement (kappa=0.457) and was the scale preferred by raters. The 1-digit Stirling scale performed least favourably. Qualitative data identified problems with scale construction relating to visualisation of the base of the wound, discolouration of the skin, abrasions and shallow ulcers. Whilst refinements in scale construction may improve rater reliability, there is a need to develop objective measures of pressure induced tissue damage.

Controversies about the decubitus ulcer

Knowledge of the decubitus ulcer has made great progress in recent decades. No longer is the diagnosis of a bedsore, as it was in the iron lung days, almost a death warrant. One cannot cause to heal a patient who is in organ failure, nor can one necessarily prevent ulcers in a new spinal cord-injured patient. Reflecting on the common cold, one realizes that prevention is limited to covering the face when sneezing, and treatment is symptomatic. There is no way of eradicating the virus of the common cold, nor is there an appropriate treatment. The decubitus ulcer should be conceived of in a similar vein, until understanding is more complete and specific treatments are available.

Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing 2 Support Surfaces

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether a viscoelastic polymer (energy absorbing) foam mattress was superior to a standard hospital mattress for pressure ulcer prevention and to analyze the cost-effectiveness in comparison with standard hospital mattresses.

DESIGN

Unblinded, randomized, prospective trial.

SETTING

Elderly acute care, rehabilitation, and orthopedic wards at 3 hospitals in the United Kingdom.

PARTICIPANTS

1168 patients at risk of developing pressure ulcers (Waterlow score, 15 to 20), with a median age of 83 years (25th to 75th percentile range, 79-87).

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were allocated to either the experimental equipment (CONFOR-Med mattress/cushion combination) or a standard mattress/cushion combination; all were given standard nursing care. Pressure areas were observed daily.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Development of nonblanching erythema.

RESULTS

A significant decrease in the incidence of blanching erythema (26.3% to 19.9%; P =.004) and a nonsignificant decrease in the incidence of nonblanching erythema occurred in participants allocated to the experimental equipment. However, when the survival curve plots were analyzed at 7 days, both categories showed statistically significant decreases (P =.0015 and P =.042, respectively). Participants on standard equipment had a relative odds ratio of 1.36 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.10-1.69) for developing blanching erythema or worse and 1.46 (95% CI, 0.90-1.82) for developing nonblanching erythema or worse. To prevent nonblanching erythema, the number needed to treat (NNT) was 41.9 (95% CI, -82.6-15.3). To prevent any erythema (blanching or nonblanching), the NNT was 11.5 (95% CI, 41.6-9.3). Participants with blanching or nonblanching erythema were significantly less mobile than participants with normal skin and more likely to have worsening mobility (P <.001). For participants with similar pressure ulcer status, mattress type was not associated with difference in mobility.

CONCLUSIONS

Regardless of prevention routine, pressure ulcers occur. In this study, the experimental equipment showed statistical significance to standard equipment for prevention of blanching erythema; significance was not achieved for nonblanching erythema. Trend and survival analysis show that a larger study is required to determine whether this nonsignificant difference is genuine.

An exploration of the factors that affect nurses' record keeping

It is generally accepted that written documentation is significant not only as a communication medium in nursing, but also in the fulfilment of a number of other professional and legal obligations for nurses. The literature suggests, however, that the records nurses keep often fail either to represent the care delivered or the patient's health status accurately. This article explores a number of possible reasons for this, including: nurses' apathy to documentation; the time-consuming nature of documentation; discrepancies between nurse/patient and nurse/nurse interpretation of the significance of an event; and nurses' literacy skills. The article identifies key areas that practising nurses and nurse educationalists need to consider if accurate and reflective nursing records are to be made. Nurses should be encouraged and supported to regard record keeping as a positive contribution to patient care, rather than as a chore to be endured.

Controversies in classifying and assessing grade I pressure ulcers

There is more uncertainty on how to define a grade I pressure ulcer than any other type. The confusion will need to be dispelled and a consensus reached if a national grading system is to be implemented. This review explores the options.

Incidence and prevalence data: can we ensure greater accuracy?

Practitioners in the UK will only know if they are meeting targets on pressure ulcer reduction if they provide valid and reliable prevalence and incidence data. But all too often, published data contain inconsistencies and can be misleading.

Pressure ulcer classification: the systems and the pitfalls

The classification of pressure ulcers constitutes an essential part of patient assessment and forms a baseline on which to monitor patients' progress and measure the outcomes of care. Four classification systems - Torrance, National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, and Stirling - are discussed. Many classification systems have been adopted by trusts despite insufficient research in their use in clinical practice. Regardless of which classification system is implemented, nurses need to be familiar with the one they are using and how to stage accurately a pressure ulcer. This can only be attained through regular education.