Moisture lesions: interrater agreement and reliability

Jan Kottner and Ruud Halfens

Journal of Clinical Nursing, 2010, vol. 19, issue 5‐6, 716-720

Abstract: Aims and objectives. The aim of this study was to examine interrater reliability and agreement of the diagnosis of moisture lesions as defined by the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel. Background. Differentiation between superficial pressure ulcers and moisture‐related skin damages is difficult. To enhance the precision of the identification of moisture lesions, the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel provided wound‐ and patient‐related characteristics. Empirical evidence regarding interrater reliability and agreement among nurses for the detection of moisture‐related skin damages in clinical practice is lacking. Design. Observational. Methods. Home care clients (n = 339) were independently assessed twice by trained nurses. A head to toe skin inspection was conducted. Results. For the diagnosis of moisture lesion (yes/no), nurses exactly agreed in 95% of all assessed clients. Interrater reliability was intraclass correlation coefficient (1,1) = 0·67 (95% CI 0·61–0·73). Conclusions. Nurses were able to differentiate between home care clients with and without moisture lesions but assessment results contained a high degree of measurement error. It seems that the descriptions for the identification of moisture lesions provided by the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel do support the diagnostic process but reliability must be enhanced. Relevance to clinical practice. Because of low interrater reliability, it is questionable whether the diagnosis of moisture lesions in clinical practice is valid. Measurement error is too high to make adequate inferences for individuals. Definitions and descriptions provided by the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, provisions of a single training and images are not sufficient to achieve acceptable interrater reliability in clinical practice.

Date: 2010
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2009.03109.x

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:19:y:2010:i:5-6:p:716-720

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Clinical Nursing from John Wiley & Sons
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().