The PUSH tool: a survey to determine its perceived usefulness.

Dan R. Berlowitz, Catherine Ratliff, Janet Cuddigan, George T. Rodeheaver

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the perceived usefulness of the Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing (PUSH). PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample identified through the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel Web site as users or registered users of the PUSH tool. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: A survey instrument was developed to capture experience, ease of use, and perceived utility and weakness of the PUSH tool. RESULTS: Of 103 respondents, most (79) agreed or strongly agreed that PUSH required an appropriate amount of time to complete. It was also found to be reliable and easy to use and teach to others. Respondents were not as positive regarding usefulness, with 75% indicating that increased PUSH scores prompt patient and treatment reassessment. Respondents agreed or strongly agreed that improvement is possible in the size subscale (59%), the tissue type subscale (49%), and the exudate amount subscale (32%). Most commonly indicated for improvement was the addition of wound depth information. CONCLUSION: Respondents generally found PUSH easy to use and helpful in pressure ulcer management. Specific areas of improvement were also identified.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)480-483
Number of pages4
JournalAdvances in skin & wound care
Volume18
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2005

Fingerprint

Pressure Ulcer
Surveys and Questionnaires
Exudates and Transudates
Wounds and Injuries

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dermatology
  • Advanced and Specialized Nursing

Cite this

The PUSH tool : a survey to determine its perceived usefulness. / Berlowitz, Dan R.; Ratliff, Catherine; Cuddigan, Janet; Rodeheaver, George T.

In: Advances in skin & wound care, Vol. 18, No. 9, 01.01.2005, p. 480-483.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Berlowitz, Dan R. ; Ratliff, Catherine ; Cuddigan, Janet ; Rodeheaver, George T. / The PUSH tool : a survey to determine its perceived usefulness. In: Advances in skin & wound care. 2005 ; Vol. 18, No. 9. pp. 480-483.
@article{73458b2c95084168b56f61dacada98f8,
title = "The PUSH tool: a survey to determine its perceived usefulness.",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: To determine the perceived usefulness of the Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing (PUSH). PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample identified through the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel Web site as users or registered users of the PUSH tool. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: A survey instrument was developed to capture experience, ease of use, and perceived utility and weakness of the PUSH tool. RESULTS: Of 103 respondents, most (79) agreed or strongly agreed that PUSH required an appropriate amount of time to complete. It was also found to be reliable and easy to use and teach to others. Respondents were not as positive regarding usefulness, with 75{\%} indicating that increased PUSH scores prompt patient and treatment reassessment. Respondents agreed or strongly agreed that improvement is possible in the size subscale (59{\%}), the tissue type subscale (49{\%}), and the exudate amount subscale (32{\%}). Most commonly indicated for improvement was the addition of wound depth information. CONCLUSION: Respondents generally found PUSH easy to use and helpful in pressure ulcer management. Specific areas of improvement were also identified.",
author = "Berlowitz, {Dan R.} and Catherine Ratliff and Janet Cuddigan and Rodeheaver, {George T.}",
year = "2005",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/00129334-200511000-00011",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "18",
pages = "480--483",
journal = "Advances in Skin and Wound Care",
issn = "1527-7941",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The PUSH tool

T2 - a survey to determine its perceived usefulness.

AU - Berlowitz, Dan R.

AU - Ratliff, Catherine

AU - Cuddigan, Janet

AU - Rodeheaver, George T.

PY - 2005/1/1

Y1 - 2005/1/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To determine the perceived usefulness of the Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing (PUSH). PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample identified through the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel Web site as users or registered users of the PUSH tool. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: A survey instrument was developed to capture experience, ease of use, and perceived utility and weakness of the PUSH tool. RESULTS: Of 103 respondents, most (79) agreed or strongly agreed that PUSH required an appropriate amount of time to complete. It was also found to be reliable and easy to use and teach to others. Respondents were not as positive regarding usefulness, with 75% indicating that increased PUSH scores prompt patient and treatment reassessment. Respondents agreed or strongly agreed that improvement is possible in the size subscale (59%), the tissue type subscale (49%), and the exudate amount subscale (32%). Most commonly indicated for improvement was the addition of wound depth information. CONCLUSION: Respondents generally found PUSH easy to use and helpful in pressure ulcer management. Specific areas of improvement were also identified.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To determine the perceived usefulness of the Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing (PUSH). PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample identified through the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel Web site as users or registered users of the PUSH tool. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: A survey instrument was developed to capture experience, ease of use, and perceived utility and weakness of the PUSH tool. RESULTS: Of 103 respondents, most (79) agreed or strongly agreed that PUSH required an appropriate amount of time to complete. It was also found to be reliable and easy to use and teach to others. Respondents were not as positive regarding usefulness, with 75% indicating that increased PUSH scores prompt patient and treatment reassessment. Respondents agreed or strongly agreed that improvement is possible in the size subscale (59%), the tissue type subscale (49%), and the exudate amount subscale (32%). Most commonly indicated for improvement was the addition of wound depth information. CONCLUSION: Respondents generally found PUSH easy to use and helpful in pressure ulcer management. Specific areas of improvement were also identified.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33644897095&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33644897095&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/00129334-200511000-00011

DO - 10.1097/00129334-200511000-00011

M3 - Article

C2 - 16365545

AN - SCOPUS:33644897095

VL - 18

SP - 480

EP - 483

JO - Advances in Skin and Wound Care

JF - Advances in Skin and Wound Care

SN - 1527-7941

IS - 9

ER -