Keywords
Neonatal Nursing
Infant
Pressure Injuries
Risk Factors
Newborn
How to Cite
Abstract
Introduction. The extreme fragility of neonatal skin, particularly in extremely preterm infants, underscores the need for effective preventive measures. This study aims to validate and design a decalogue for the prevention of dependency-related skin lesions (DRSL) in the neonatal population, based on existing consensus documents.
Methods. The Delphi method was employed to validate the content of the decalogue through expert consultation across Spain. Key criteria—including relevance, clarity, ambiguity, simplicity, satisfaction, and applicability—were assessed using a 4-point Likert scale and a 10-point scale, with a 75% agreement threshold for validation. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze responses. Items not meeting the threshold were revised based on qualitative feedback and re-evaluated. The final list of interventions was established through consensus in the second round.
Results. A total of 23 experts participated in the first round, and 20 in the second. Across both rounds, all items were validated with a high level of agreement. In the second round, all items exceeded 85% agreement for relevance, clarity, ambiguity, and simplicity. The average satisfaction (9.36–9.47) and applicability (9.09–9.42) revealed a high level of agreement concerning the clinical applicability of the Decalogue. The decalogue outlines essential measures for preventing DRSL in neonates, including risk assessment, postural changes, the use of specialized pressure-relieving surfaces, and monitoring of device-related pressure points. It also highlights the importance of tailored skin care based on neonatal maturity and the need for thorough documentation of preventive interventions.
Discussion. Consensus achieved via the Delphi process substantiates the Decalogue’s capacity to effectively articulate key preventive strategies with clarity and brevity. Moreover, its implementation will foster evidence-based care practices, ultimately enhancing the quality of care in neonatal units. However, ongoing efforts are required to further improve DRSL prevention and continuously update strategies in light of emerging evidence.
References
1. García‑Fernández FP, Agreda JJS, Verdú J, Pancorbo‑Hidalgo PL. A new theoretical model for the development of pressure ulcers and other dependence-related lesions. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2014;46(1):28–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12051
2. Nieva‑Sausa C, López‑Medina IM. Eficacia de las medidas de prevención de úlceras por presión en neonatos y niños: revisión sistemática. Gerokomos. 2022;33(2):127–132. Accessed Feb 7, 2025. http://scielo.isciii.es/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1134-928X2022000200012&lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es
3. García‑Molina P, Balaguer‑López E, García‑Fernández FP, Ferrera‑Fernández MÁ, Blasco JM, Verdú J. Pressure ulcers’ incidence, preventive measures, and risk factors in neonatal intensive care and intermediate care units. Int Wound J. 2018;15(4):571–579. https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12900
4. Boyd SM, Tapawan SJ, Badawi N, Popat H. Protecting the brain of the micropreemie. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2022;27(3):101370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.siny.2022.101370
5. McPherson C, Miller SP, El‑Dib M, Massaro AN, Inder TE. The influence of pain, agitation, and their management on the immature brain. Pediatr Res. 2020;88(2):168–175. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390-019-0744-6
6. Mora-Morillo IM, Avilés-Avilés JM, Balaguer-López E, Ferrera-Fernández MÁ, García-Molina P. Prevención de lesiones por presión en neonatos. 2021:0-94. https://www.seenenfermeria.com/sites/default/files/documentos/prevencion-de-lesiones-por-presion_0.pdf
7. Nicolosi B, Parente E, Marilli I, Prisco R, Gregorini M, Ciofi D. Investigation of the prevalence of skin injuries in hospitalized newborns and main reports: an observational, cross-sectional, and monocentric pilot study. Infermieristica J. 2024;3(1):63–70. https://doi.org/10.36253/if-2412
8. Alfaro López A, Balaguer López E, Pérez Paredes A, et al. Efectividad de las medidas y estrategias de prevención de úlceras por presión en neonatos. Gerokomos. 2020;31(3):193–197. https://doi.org/10.4321/s1134-928x2020000300011
9. Gray M. Context for practice: pressure injury prevention in the neonatal intensive care unit, stoma and peristomal complications, post‑prostatectomy incontinence, and best practice amongst foot & nail care providers. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2021;48(5):379. https://doi.org/10.1097/WON.0000000000000808
10. Razmus IS, Keep SM. Neonatal intensive care nursing pressure injury prevention practices: a descriptive survey. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2021;48(5):394–402. https://doi.org/10.1097/WON.0000000000000805
11. Schlüer AB, Müller AY, Fromme NP, et al. Use of a novel pressure distribution system for severely ill neonates: a clinical pilot study carried out by the PREPICare consortium. BMC Pediatr. 2023;23(1):42. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-023-04252-2
12. Cummins KA, Watters R, Leming‑Lee TS. Reducing pressure injuries in the pediatric intensive care unit. Nurs Clin North Am. 2019;54(1):127–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnur.2018.10.005
13. Gattrell WT, Logullo P, van Zuuren EJ, et al. ACCORD (Accurate Consensus Reporting Document): A reporting guideline for consensus methods in biomedicine developed via a modified Delphi. PLoS Med. 2024;21(1):e1004326. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004326
14. Hasson F, Keeney S, McKenna H. Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. J Adv Nurs. 2000;32(4):1008–1015. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.t01-1-01567.x
15. Lynn MR. Determination and quantification of content validity. Nurs Res. 1986;35(6):382–386. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-198611000-00017
16. Polit DF, Beck CT. The content validity index: Are you sure what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Res Nurs Health. 2006;29(5):489–497. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20147
17. Yaghmaie F. Content validity and its estimation. J Med Edu. 2003;3(1):e105015. https://doi.org/10.22037/jme.v3i1.870
18. Merino Soto C, Livia Segovia J. Intervalos de confianza asimétricos para el índice la validez de contenido: un programa Visual Basic para la V de Aiken. Anales Psicol. 2009;25:161–71. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.25.1.50551
19. Pittman J, Beeson T, Kitterman J, Lancaster S, Shelly A. Medical device–related hospital‑acquired pressure ulcers: development of an evidence‑based position statement. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2015;42(2):151–154. https://doi.org/10.1097/WON.0000000000000113
20. Squires AJ, Hyndman M. Prevention of nasal injuries secondary to NCPAP application in the ELBW infant. Neonatal Netw. 2009;28(1):13–27. https://doi.org/10.1891/0730-0832.28.1.13
21. Jani P, Mishra U, Buchmayer J, et al. Global variation in skin injuries and skincare practices in extremely preterm infants. World J Pediatr. 2023;19(2):139–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12519-022-00625-2
22. Broom M, Dunk AM, E Mohamed AL. Predicting neonatal skin injury: the first step to reducing skin injuries in neonates. Health Serv Insights. 2019;12:1178632919845630. https://doi.org/10.1177/1178632919845630
23. Milligan PS, Goldstein MR. Implementation of an evidence‑based non‑invasive respiratory support (NIRS) bundle in the NICU to decrease nasal injury complications. J Neonatal Nurs. 2017;23(2):89–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnn.2016.05.003
24. Csoma ZR, Meszes A, Ábrahám R, Kemény L, Tálosi G, Doró P. Iatrogenic skin disorders and related factors in newborn infants. Pediatr Dermatol. 2016;33(5):543–548. https://doi.org/10.1111/pde.12960
25. Curcio F, Abellán MV, Dioni E, de Lima MM, Saldaña MR. Validity and reliability of the Italian–Neonatal Skin Risk Assessment Scale (i‑NSRAS). Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2024;80:103561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iccn.2023.103561
26. Curcio F, Vaquero‑Abellán M, Zicchi M, Romero‑Saldaña M. Translation and cross‑cultural adaptation of the Neonatal Skin Risk Assessment Scale (NSRAS) to Italian. J Tissue Viability. 2022;31(4):693–698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtv.2022.07.004
27. Nicolosi B, Curcio F, Gheorghe MA, Ranieri P, Parente E. Risk assessment of pressure injuries in newborns. Appropriateness of Glamorgan and NSRAS scales: a scoping review. Infermieristica J. 2024;3(1):45–60. https://doi.org/10.36253/if-2403
28. Balaguer‑López E, Estañ‑Capell J, Rodríguez Dolz MC, Barberá Ventura MC, Ruescas López M, García‑Molina P. Incidencia de dermatitis asociada a la incontinencia en neonatos hospitalizados. Adaptación y validación de una escala de gravedad. An Pediatr (Engl Ed). 2024;100(6):420–427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anpedi.2024.04.004
29. August DL, Edmonds L, Brown DK, Murphy M, Kandasamy Y. Pressure injuries to the skin in a neonatal unit: fact or fiction. J Neonatal Nurs. 2014;20(3):129–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnn.2013.08.006
30. Javaheri Abkenar M, Khanali Mojen L, Shakeri F, Varzeshnejad M. Skin injuries and its related factors in the neonatal intensive care unit. Iran J Neonatol. 2020;11(4). https://doi.org/10.22038/ijn.2020.45342.1756
31. Visscher M, King A, Nie AM, Schaffer P, Taylor T, Pruitt D, Giaccone MJ, Ashby M, Keswani S. A quality-improvement collaborative project to reduce pressure ulcers in PICUs. Pediatrics. 2013;131(6):e1950–e1960. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2012-1626
32. Munson KA, Bare DE, Hoath SB, Visscher MO. A survey of skin care practices for premature low birth weight infants. Neonatal Netw. 1999;18(3):25–31. https://doi.org/10.1891/0730-0832.18.3.25
33. Lund C. Medical adhesives in the NICU. Newborn Infant Nurs Rev. 2014;14(4):160–165. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.nainr.2014.10.001
de Souza S, Takashima M, Silva TL, et al. Use of tissue adhesive for neonatal intravenous access devices: a scoping review. Eur J Pediatr. 2024;183(12):3687–3696. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00431-024-05800-3
34. August DL, Kandasamy Y, Ray R, Lindsay D, New K. Fresh perspectives on hospital‑acquired neonatal skin injury period prevalence from a multicenter study: length of stay, acuity, and incomplete course of antenatal steroids. J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 2021;35(3):275–283. https://doi.org/10.1097/JPN.0000000000000513
35. Brandon D, Hill CM, Heimall L, et al. Neonatal skin care: evidence‑based clinical practice guideline. 4th ed. Association of Women’s Health, Obstet and Neonatal Nurses; 2018.
36. Boswell N, Waker CL. Comparing 2 adhesive methods on skin integrity in the high‑risk neonate. Adv Neonatal Care. 2016;16(6):449–454. https://doi.org/10.1097/ANC.0000000000000333
37. Mishra U, August D, Walker K, Jani PR, Tracy M. Thermoregulation, incubator humidity, and skincare practices in AGA ultra-low birth weight infants: need for more evidence. World J Pediatr. 2024;20(7):643–652. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12519-024-00818-x
38. Newnam KM, McGrath JM, Salyer J, Estes T, Jallo N, Bass WT. A comparative effectiveness study of continuous positive airway pressure-related skin breakdown when using different nasal interfaces in the extremely low birth weight neonate. Appl Nurs Res. 2015;28(1):36–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnr.2014.05.005
39. Fujii K, Sugama J, Okuwa M, Sanada H, Mizokami Y. Incidence and risk factors of pressure ulcers in seven neonatal intensive care units in Japan: a multisite prospective cohort study. Int Wound J. 2010;7(5):323–328. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-481x.2010.00688.x
40. Yong SC, Chen SJ, Boo NY. Incidence of nasal trauma associated with nasal prong versus nasal mask during continuous positive airway pressure treatment in very low birthweight infants: a randomized control study. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2005;90(6):F480. https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.2004.069351
41. Balaguer-Escutia P, García-Molina P, Balaguer-López E, Montal-Navarro MA. Análisis de la aparición de lesiones por presión en neonatos portadores de ventilación mecánica no invasiva. Gerokomos. 2023;34(1).
42. Collins CL, Barfield C, Horne RSC, Davis PG. A comparison of nasal trauma in preterm infants extubated to either heated humidified high-flow nasal cannulae or nasal continuous positive airway pressure. Eur J Pediatr. 2014;173(2):181–186. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00431-013-2139-8
43. Cubells Celda R, Montal Navarro M, Rodríguez Dolz M, et al. Prevención de úlceras por presión en neonatos con ventilación mecánica no invasiva. Gerokomos. 2020;31(2).
44. Nie AM. Top ten tips: preventing pressure injuries in paediatric patients. Wounds International. 2024;15(4).
45. Baharestani MM. An overview of neonatal and pediatric wound care knowledge and considerations. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2007;53(6):34–55. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AWM.0000260489.91727.0a
46. Barbera‑Ventura M, Castaño‑Pico M, Cervera Gasch A, Cortes‑Zapatero E, Dolz‑Alabau M. Documento de Consenso INCATIV Pediátrico. Ediciones CECOVA; 2023.
47. García Molina P, Bargos Munárriz M, Ferrera Fernández M, Balaguer López E, Mora Morillo I, Avilés Avilés J. Qué no hacer en lesiones por presión en pediatría‑neonatología. In: Grupo Nacional para el Estudio y Asesoramiento en Úlceras por Presión y Heridas 48. Crónicas, ed. Recomendaciones basadas en la evidencia. Logroño: Grupo Nacional; 2021:0‑37.
49. Quesada Ramos C, Pérez Acevedo G, García Molina P. Heridas en pediatría: úlceras por presión, dermatitis asociada a incontinencia y lesiones por extravasación. Revista ROL de Enfermería. 2018;41:11–12.
50. Balaguer López E, García Molina P, Rodríguez Dolz M, Alonso C, Larburu I, Baquero Fernández C. Cuidados de la piel en neonatos portadores de ventilación mecánica no invasiva. 2019:0–109. https://www.seenenfermeria.com/sites/default/files/documentos/cuidados_de_la_piel_en_neonatos_portadores_del_vmni-13_05_19.pdf
Authors retain copyright in their work and do not transfer copyright to the Journal or Publisher.
Upon acceptance and publication, authors grant iEditore a non-exclusive right of first publication and a non-exclusive right to publish, reproduce, distribute, preserve, register, index, promote, communicate, and make the article available as part of the International Journal of Wound Research.
Unless otherwise clearly indicated, the published Version of Record is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence (CC BY 4.0).
The CC BY 4.0 licence permits readers and other third parties to copy, share, distribute, reproduce, adapt, translate, and reuse the published article in any medium or format, including for commercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given to the authors and original publication, a link to the licence is provided, and any changes are indicated.
Authors may share, deposit, reproduce, distribute, adapt, translate, and otherwise reuse their own original work without requesting permission from the Journal or Publisher. The CC BY 4.0 licence governs reuse by readers and other third parties and does not restrict the authors’ exercise of the copyright they retain.
The Creative Commons licence applies only to material for which the authors or Publisher are legally entitled to grant that licence. Third-party material excluded from the licence must be clearly identified and may require separate permission for reuse.