Search

Aim: The study aims to compare the available data on the prevalence of pressure ulcers from national databases with the data of a specific provider of health services – University Hospital Ostrava, analysis of the differences found and identification of their causes. Materials and methods: Retrospective observational study. The file included data on hospitalisations of patients with pressure ulcers from the National Register of Reimbursed Health Services (NRRHS) and the Hospital Information System of the University Hospital Ostrava (HIS UHO) from 2018 to 2020. Results: Between 2018 and 2020, a total of 294 hospitalisations of patients with pressure ulcers were reported to the NRRHS, while 2,231 were registered in the HIS UHO. The number of hospitalisations with pressure ulcers was up to eight times higher in the analysed period in the HIS UHO than can be detected from the dia-gnosis with the code L89 according to ICD-10 for health insurance companies. There is an average of 1.6 pressure ulcers per hospitalisation. The structural differences in the prevalence of pressure ulcers between HIS UHO and NRRHS (higher proportion of lower pressure ulcer categories, lower average age of patients with pressure ulcers and higher mortality of patients with pressure ulcers) are probably because a patient appears once in NRRHS regardless of the number of pressure ulcers and because lower pressure ulcer categories are not reported because they usually do not require an identifiable procedure from the list of medical procedures. Conclusion: The study showed that the actual prevalence of pressure ulcers could be significantly higher than the available national NRRHS statistics. The study results also support the importance and necessity of research on the cost-effectiveness of the prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The purpose of study was to analyse the use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) in a selected university hospital in the Czech Republic. Patients and methods: A retrospective non-interventional study. The sample included all records of inpatients treated by NPWT in a selected medical facility (university hospital) in the period from 2015 to 2017. Data was extracted from the university hospital information system. Results: NPWT was reported in 276 hospitalized patients. The mean time of application of NPWT was 19 days (median 10), the average number of dressing changes was 3.74 (median 2), and the exchange interval was once every 2.99 days (median 2.33). Detailed analysis of 2017 showed that in the vast majority of cases the outcome of NPWT treatment was positive (N = 77, 84.62%), in only two cases the effect was not beneficial (2.20%) and rest of cases was not possible to assess clearly (N = 12, 13.19%). Conclusion: NPWT is an effective treatment for wounds of many different aetiologies, but there are differences in its use. As we identified different approaches in application and lack of standardisation, we assume that education of health care providers in this area is a necessary and essential aspect to support the appropriate use of NPWT and for the unification of procedures for the quality of care improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The purpose of study was to analyse the use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) in a selected university hospital in the Czech Republic. Patients and methods: A retrospective noninterventional study. The sample included all records of inpatients treated by NPWT in a selected medical facility (university hospital) in the period from 2015 to 2017. Data was extracted from the university hospital information system. Results: NPWT was reported in 276 hospitalized patients. The mean time of application of NPWT was 19 days (median 10), the average number of dressing changes was 3.74 (median 2), and the exchange interval was once every 2.99 days (median 2.33). Detailed analysis of 2017 showed that in the vast majority of cases the outcome of NPWT treatment was positive (N = 77, 84.62%), in only two cases the eff ect was not benefi cial (2.20%) and rest of cases was not possible to assess clearly (N = 12, 13.19%). Conclusion: NPWT is an eff ective treatment for wounds of many diff erent aetiologies, but there are diff erences in its use. As we identified diff erent approaches in application and lack of standardisation, we assume that education of health care providers in this area is a necessary and essential aspect to support the appropriate use of NPWT and for the unifi cation of procedures for the quality of care improvement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: The aim of the study was to document and analyze the quality of life (QoL) of a group of hospitalized patients with non-healing wounds by type of wound and to interpret the results of studies on QoL in patients with non-healing wounds. Materials and methods: Prospective cross-sectional study in patients with non-healing wounds in the University Hospital Ostrava (September 2017–October 2018). The QoL assessment was carried out using the Wound-QoL questionnaire, filled on admission to hospital and 7th day of hospitalization. Data analysis was performed by Microsoft Excel and IBM SPSS software (significance level 0.05). Results: 262 questionnaires were filled in 191 patients. 246 (100%) questionnaires (191 [77.6%] of primary assessments and 55 [22.4%] of assessments on 7th day of hospitalization) were used after the exclusion of inadequately filled in forms. The QoL was quantified using the global score of the Wound-QoL. Conclusion: The study showed that the quality of life of patients with non-healing wounds varied according to the type of wound in primary assessment. The worst global score was found in patients with diabetic foot syndrome. The QoL did not differ between men and women in primary assessment. Wound-QoL has been proven to be an effective, easy-to-use and easy-to-evaluate tool for assessing the quality of life of patients with non-healing wounds in the study. Supported by Ministry of Health, Czech Republic – conceptual development of research organization (FNOs/ 2017). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pressure ulcers (PUs) impose a significant economic burden on healthcare systems, affecting patient quality of life and leading to substantial treatment costs. This study presents a cost-of-illness analysis of PU treatment in hospitalized patients in the Czech Republic, based on real-world clinical data. The analysis was conducted using a comprehensive methodology at a Czech university hospital, involving 304 hospitalizations. The study included all hospitalized patients with PUs. Data were collected employing a bottom-up, person-based approach, which refers to the collection and analysis of cost data at the individual patient level. This method captures detailed resource utilization for each patient. The methodology accounted for both systemic and local costs, including materials, medications, caregiver time, and procedures. The study involved 304 hospitalizations, with a mean length of stay of 13 days. The total cost of PU treatment, excluding pharmacotherapy, had a median of €678, while including pharmacotherapy, the median cost rose to €929. Younger patients incurred higher treatment costs. Significant cost variations were observed among different departments. We developed and applied a novel cost model to quantify the expenses associated with PUs, which accurately highlighted the financial burden in the hospital care setting. We present a rigorous methodology for PU cost-of-illness analysis, providing a valuable tool for future research and clinical practice. This comprehensive approach supports the development of targeted interventions to reduce the incidence and severity of PUs, ultimately improving patient care and reducing healthcare costs., (© 2025 The Author(s). International Wound Journal published by Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: Pressure ulcers (PUs) are a significant healthcare problem with a negative impact on patients' quality of life and incurring substantial healthcare expenses. Our study aimed to analyse the costs of treating PUs in hospitalised patients in the Czech Republic, in the context of current treatment procedures and price levels, and to pilot-test the detailed methodology developed., Method: A prospective, observational, non-interventional study was conducted at the Clinic of Anesthesiology, Resuscitation and Intensive Medicine, the Internal Medicine Department and the Surgical Department of the University Hospital Ostrava. The study included all hospitalised patients with a PU from March-May 2021. Data were collected using the hospital information system. A bottom-up, person-based approach to cost analysis was used, based on a comprehensive cost structure using accurate patient-specific consumption records., Results: The length of hospitalisations ranged from 1-31 (mean: 12.7) days. The average cost of PU treatment per hospitalisation was calculated at €1579. The average daily cost of PU treatment was €179, including antibiotic therapy (ATB) and €112 without ATB. Most of the costs were associated with ATB (38.6%) and caregivers' time (35.9%). Based on the results, a predictive model was developed to estimate the cost of treating a hospitalised patient with a PU, which could be used in future research to assess the costs of treating these patients., Conclusion: We have faced many challenges in the methodology of preparation of cost analysis (e.g., how to count amorphous topical agents and sprays, how to properly identify PUs, how to price the positioning aids and mattresses, and how to relate the ATB treatment to the PU). This analysis provides important input for developing a comprehensive and more accurate methodology for monitoring PU costs in hospitalised patients, applicable in clinical practice for inpatient healthcare providers., Competing Interests: Declaration of interest: This work was supported by the Ministry of Health of the Czech Republic under grant no. NU20-09-00094 ‘Cost analysis of pressure ulcers treatment – determinant of care.’ All rights reserved. The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Background: Pressure ulcers/pressure injuries (PUs/PIs) relate to decreasing quality of life, prolonged hospitalisation, the increased economic cost of care, and increased mortality. That's why this study focused on one of the mentioned factors - mortality., Objectives: The study analyses national data in the Czech Republic to map the mortality phenomenon comprehensively based on data from national health registries., Method: The retrospective, nationwide cross-sectional data analysis of data collected by the National Health Information System (NHIS) has been provided in the period 2010-2019 with a special focus on 2019. Hospitalisations with PUs/PIs were identified by reporting L89.0-L89.9 diagnosis as a primary or secondary hospitalisation diagnosis. We also included all the patients who died in the given year with an L89 diagnosis reported in 365 days prior the death., Results: In 2019, 52.1% of patients with reported PUs/PIs were hospitalised, and 40.8% were treated on an outpatient basis. The most common underlying cause of death mortality diagnosis (43.7%) in these patients was the diseases of the circulatory system. Patients who die in a healthcare facility while hospitalised with an L89 diagnosis generally have a higher category of PUs/PIs than persons who die outside a healthcare facility., Conclusion: The proportion of patients dying in a health facility is directly proportional to the increasing PUs/PIs category. In 2019, 57% of patients with PUs/PIs died in a healthcare facility, and 19% died in the community. In 24% of patients who died in the healthcare facility, PUs/PIs were reported 365 days before the death., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

The study aims to follow up on the analysis of Pressure injuries (PIs) prevalence conducted between 2007 and 2014 and after the new methodological requirements for PIs surveillance establishment at the national level. A retrospective, nationwide cross-sectional analysis of data regarding the STROBE checklist was collected by the National Health Information System (NHIS). The International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) diagnoses L89.0-L89.9 for PIs were used in the period 2010-2019. A total of 264 442 records of patients with diagnoses of L89.0-L89.9 were identified from 2010 to 2019 (26 444 patients per year on average). The numbers are increasing every year, and there is a 40% increase between 2010 and 2019. When comparing recorded PIs, the percentage of PIs occurrence in category I decreased, and the number of PIs in category IV increased in the second analysed period. Still, in absolute numbers, there is an increase across all categories. The age of patients with recorded PIs also rose slightly in the second analysed period. We have proven the PIs prevalence increase in an ageing population., (© 2022 The Authors. International Wound Journal published by Medicalhelplines.com Inc (3M) and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Oncology wounds and wounds of other etiology are rare but serious complications, which significantly impair patients quality of life. Preventive and curative interventions and education of healthcare personnel and patients reduce the risk of either their occurrence or their impact and consequences. A working group of authors from professional groups (the Supportive Care Group of the Czech Society for Oncology, the Czech Society for Wound Healing, the Society for Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics, and the Czech Nurses Association) prepared recommendations for care. A comprehensive approach to the treatment of oncological wounds, including symptomatic treatment of associated healing complications, prevention, early detection, interdisciplinary cooperation and education are essential to deal with wounds related to chemotherapy administration, radiotherapy and oncological treatment in general. The proper choice of local care products and the eventuality of active oncological treatment are important elements of care in ulcerating tumors., Purpose: A basic summary of recommended interventions to prevent and treat oncology wounds in daily practice, defined based on expert societies guidelines, trials and literature data, proven practice and on the consensus opinions of the authors group members. The recommended procedures contribute to the reduction of the development, severity and consequences of oncological wounds and wounds of other etiology in oncological  patients.

Background: COVID-19 significantly influences the overall patient status and, in severe symptomatology, the ability to move and the low oxygenation of the tissue for the ventilated patient in Intensive Care Units (ICU). There is a higher risk for Pressure injuries (PIs) development., Objectives: The nationwide analyses of the National health register aimed to compare the prevalence of PIs reported before the pandemic COVID-19 started and during the pandemic in 2020., Method: A retrospective, nationwide cross-sectional analysis of data regarding the STROBE checklist collected by the National Health Information System (NHIS), focusing on the PIs reporting based on the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) diagnoses L89.0-L89.9 for PIs in 2020. The data from the pandemic period of COVID-19 in 2020 were compared to the prevalence of PI cases in the period 2010-2019 in the Czech Republic in all hospitalized patients., Results: The total number of admissions for L89 in 2020 was 14,441, of which 1509 (10.4%) also had COVID-19. In the ICU were 4386 admissions, 12.1% of which also had COVID-19. A higher proportion of PIs is observed in patients hospitalized with COVID-19 than in patients without COVID-19 (2.62% vs 0.81%, respectively 1.05% vs 0.46% when standardized to the 2013 ESP = European Standard Population). In patients hospitalized in ICU, 3.68% with COVID-19 had PIs vs 1.42% without COVID-19 had PIs (1.97% vs 0.81% using the 2013 ESP)., Conclusion: The national health registers analyses have proven that the prevalence of PIs was higher among patients hospitalized with the SARS-CoV-2 infection., (Copyright © 2022 Tissue Viability Society / Society of Tissue Viability. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Radiation dermatitis is a very common reaction to radiotherapy, affecting approx. 95% of patients with varying intensity. It is crucial to minimize its side effects. The working group that prepared this document includes physicians, nurses, representatives of the Society for Radiation Oncology, Biology and Physics of the Czech Medical Association of J. E. Purkyně, the Supportive Treatment and Care Section of the Czech Society for Oncology of the Czech Medical Association of J. E. Purkyně, the Czech Wound Management Association, the Oncological Section of Czech Association of Nurses, and dermatologists. The document has been approved by the committees of these associations., Purpose: Recommendation for preventive and therapeutic skin care of patients undergoing radiotherapy in the Czech Republic.