ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Clinical Assessment of Medical Device-Related Pressure Injury Risk: Profiling Risk Levels in Patients Using Medical Devices.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the risk of medical device-related pressure injury (MDRPI) development among patients exposed to medical devices and to assess the clinical utility of the Medical Device-Related Pressure Injury Risk Assessment Scale (MDRPIS).
methodsThis clinical assessment study included 132 patients receiving care in intensive care, palliative care, and home-care units. The MDRPIS total score ranges from 8 to 27, with scores of 8-12 indicating high risk, 13-21 indicating moderate risk, and 22-27 indicating low risk. The scale was used to assess MDRPI risk associated with life-sustaining medical devices. Its psychometric performance was evaluated through analyses of internal consistency, criterion validity against the Braden Scale, and diagnostic accuracy using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.
resultsThe MDRPIS demonstrated strong discriminative ability for identifying patients at risk of MDRPI, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.822. A cut-off score of ≤16 was identified as the optimal threshold for detecting high-risk patients. Patients with MDRPIS scores of 16 or lower had a significantly higher incidence of MDRPI than those classified as low risk (
conclusionsClinical settings, particularly intensive care and palliative care units, should incorporate the MDRPIS into routine risk assessment protocols to facilitate targeted preventive interventions, including prophylactic dressings and advanced fixation techniques for patients using high-risk devices such as NIV masks and tracheostomy securement systems. The systematic implementation of the MDRPIS may support more effective allocation of nursing resources and enhance patient safety by enabling the early identification and prevention of avoidable device-related pressure injuries. Furthermore, the findings indicate that an MDRPIS score of 16 or below represents a clinically meaningful threshold for initiating preventive interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.