PI34 Facility Acquired Pressure Injuries (FAPIs) in Acute Care 2009-2017

Glenda B. Kelman, PhD, ACNP-BC, Nursing, The Sage Colleges and St. Peter's Health Partners, Troy, NY and Mary Anne Jadlos, MS, ACNP-BC, CWON, Skin, & Ostomy Nursing Nursing Service, St. Peter's Health Partners - Albany Memorial, Samaritan and St. Mary's Hospitals, Troy, NY
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate Facility Acquired Pressure Injuries (FAPIs) in two community hospitals in upstate New York from 2009 to 2017.

Background/Significance: Pressure Injuries (PrIs) are a major health care issue in the U.S. impacting approximately 2.5 million adults annually. Facility Acquired Pressure Injury (FAPI) incidence rates range from 0% to 53.4%. U.S. FAPI treatment costs are estimated as high as $11.6 billion annually. Understanding factors contributing to the development of FAPIs may prevent avoidable complications. Engaging nurses in prevalence studies facilitates commitment, ownership and empowers nurses to "Champion" quality cost-effective care in preventing FAPIs.  

Method: After IRB approval, a review of 23 FAPI prevalence studies from 2009 to 2017 was conducted based on 3,436 patients in two hospitals. A Root Cause Analysis (RCA) was conducted for each FAPI (n = 66). 

Results: The FAPI for both hospitals ranged from 0.8% to 4.7% during the eight year period. The average rate of FAPI excluding Stage 1 was 2.1% which is LOWER than the International 2017 FAPI reported rate excluding Stage 1 of 2.3% based on 111,689 patients. The FAPI rate for both hospitals remains below the international benchmark. Root cause analyses revealed common FAPI sites (coccyx, sacrum and heels) consistent with current international research findings. In 2017, a Stage 2 pressure injury related to a medical device was documented.

Conclusions: FAPI prevalence data is essential in analyzing rates and trends including Root Cause Analysis (RCA) to improve evidence-based practice in PrI prevention and management, and to reduce costs. In addition, retrospective and concurrent data can be used to establish institutional benchmarks to align with National “Best Practices”. Research implications include continued data collection including medical device related pressure injuries. Further data analysis will include examining relationships between Braden risk scores, demographic variables and FAPIs.