Journal Articles

Should expert opinion or research findings guide PU grading changes?

Share this article

Should expert opinion or research findings guide PU grading changes?

Michael Clark
31 August 2008

The pressure ulcer community often agrees that relatively little is known about the fine detail of our field, for example, we do not have much information about the effectiveness of our inter ventions, and the true risk factors for pressure ulcer development remain elusive.

One area where agreement had generally been reached was in the description of pressure ulcers — for more than 20 years a four stage (or grade) system had been seen as sufficient to describe all forms of pressure ulcer encountered. While the definition of the presumed most superficial form of pressure damage (grade 1) was subject to considerable debate through the 1980s (with eventual consensus upon ‘non-blanchable er ythema’ to define grade 1 damage), the remainder of the classification system (grades 2–4) have remained essentially unchanged since the mid-1970s. However, this accepted wisdom is now being reviewed both in Europe and the United States.

Free for all healthcare professionals

Sign up to the Wounds Group journals

By clicking ‘Subscribe’, you are agreeing that the Wounds Group are able to email you periodic newsletters. You may unsubscribe from these at any time. Your info is safe with us and we will never sell or trade your details. For information please review our privacy policy.

Are you a healthcare professional? This website is for healthcare professionals only. To continue, please confirm that you are a healthcare professional below.

We use cookies responsibly to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your browser settings, we’ll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on this website. Read about how we use cookies.

I am not a healthcare professional.