These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

125 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21132863)

  • 1. Response to Kottner, Commentary on Sayar S, Turgut S, Doğan H, Ekici A, Yurtsever S, Demirkan F, Doruk N & Taşdelen B (2009) Incidence of pressure ulcers in intensive care unit patients at risk according to the Waterlow Scale and factors influencing the development of pressure ulcers. Journal of Clinical Nursing 18, 765–774.
    Yurtsever S; Sayar S; Demirkan F; Taşdelen B
    J Clin Nurs; 2010 Dec; 19(23-24):3591-2. PubMed ID: 21132863
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Commentary on Sayar S et al. (2009) Incidence of pressure ulcers in intensive care unit patients at risk according to the Waterlow scale and factors influencing the development of pressure ulcers. Journal of Clinical Nursing 18, 765-774.
    Kottner J
    J Clin Nurs; 2009 Mar; 18(5):776-7. PubMed ID: 19239544
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Incidence of pressure ulcers in intensive care unit patients at risk according to the Waterlow scale and factors influencing the development of pressure ulcers.
    Sayar S; Turgut S; Doğan H; Ekici A; Yurtsever S; Demirkan F; Doruk N; Taşdelen B
    J Clin Nurs; 2009 Mar; 18(5):765-74. PubMed ID: 19077014
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Incidence of pressure ulcers in a neurologic intensive care unit.
    Fife C; Otto G; Capsuto EG; Brandt K; Lyssy K; Murphy K; Short C
    Crit Care Med; 2001 Feb; 29(2):283-90. PubMed ID: 11246307
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Pressure ulcer risk assessment in critical care: interrater reliability and validity studies of the Braden and Waterlow scales and subjective ratings in two intensive care units.
    Kottner J; Dassen T
    Int J Nurs Stud; 2010 Jun; 47(6):671-7. PubMed ID: 20003975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Pressure ulcer risk assessment immediately after cardiac surgery--does it make a difference? A comparison of three pressure ulcer risk assessment instruments within a cardiac surgery population.
    Feuchtinger J; Halfens R; Dassen T
    Nurs Crit Care; 2007; 12(1):42-9. PubMed ID: 17883663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Predicting the risk of pressure ulcers in critically ill patients.
    Carlson EV; Kemp MG; Shott S
    Am J Crit Care; 1999 Jul; 8(4):262-9. PubMed ID: 10392227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Development of a new risk assessment scale for predicting pressure ulcers in an intensive care unit.
    Suriadi ; Sanada H; Sugama J; Thigpen B; Subuh M
    Nurs Crit Care; 2008; 13(1):34-43. PubMed ID: 18226053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. [Validity of the Waterlow scale for pressure ulcer risk assessment in the intensive care unit: a prospective analysis of 698 patients].
    Compton F; Strauss M; Hortig T; Frey J; Hoffmann F; Zidek W; Schäfer JH
    Pflege; 2008 Feb; 21(1):37-48. PubMed ID: 18478685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. An evaluation of the Waterlow pressure ulcer risk-assessment tool.
    Thompson D
    Br J Nurs; 2005 Apr 28-May 11; 14(8):455-9. PubMed ID: 15924028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Validity of pressure ulcer risk assessment scales; Cubbin and Jackson, Braden, and Douglas scale.
    Jun Seongsook RN; Jeong Ihnsook RN; Lee Younghee RN
    Int J Nurs Stud; 2004 Feb; 41(2):199-204. PubMed ID: 14725784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluation of three commonly used pressure ulcer risk assessment scales.
    O'Tuathail C; Taqi R
    Br J Nurs; 2011 Mar 24-Apr 14; 20(6):S27-8, S30, S32 Passim. PubMed ID: 21471902
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The relationship among pressure ulcer risk factors, incidence and nursing documentation in hospital-acquired pressure ulcer patients in intensive care units.
    Li D
    J Clin Nurs; 2016 Aug; 25(15-16):2336-47. PubMed ID: 27302084
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A new instrument for predicting pressure ulcer risk in an intensive care unit.
    Suriadi ; Sanada H; Sugama J; Thigpen B; Kitagawa A; Kinosita S; Murayama S
    J Tissue Viability; 2006 Aug; 16(3):21-6. PubMed ID: 16921993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Predicting pressure ulcer risk with the modified Braden, Braden, and Norton scales in acute care hospitals in Mainland China.
    Kwong E; Pang S; Wong T; Ho J; Shao-ling X; Li-jun T
    Appl Nurs Res; 2005 May; 18(2):122-8. PubMed ID: 15991112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. [Decubitus ulcers in oncology, first results of a study].
    Fromantin I; Routkovsky-Norval C
    Soins; 2003 Apr; (674):22-3. PubMed ID: 12724987
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Incidence and risk factors associated with the development of pressure ulcers in an intensive care unit.
    González-Méndez MI; Lima-Serrano M; Martín-Castaño C; Alonso-Araujo I; Lima-Rodríguez JS
    J Clin Nurs; 2018 Mar; 27(5-6):1028-1037. PubMed ID: 28960550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Comparing Norton, Braden and Waterlow risk assessment scales for pressure ulcers in spinal cord injuries.
    Wellard S; Lo SK
    Contemp Nurse; 2000 Jun; 9(2):155-60. PubMed ID: 11855004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Predictive validity of Waterlow Scale for pressure ulcer development risk in hospitalized patients.
    Serpa LF; de Gouveia Santos VL; Gomboski G; Rosado SM
    J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs; 2009; 36(6):640-6. PubMed ID: 19920745
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Risk assessment scales for pressure ulcers: a methodological review.
    Papanikolaou P; Lyne P; Anthony D
    Int J Nurs Stud; 2007 Feb; 44(2):285-96. PubMed ID: 17141782
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.