IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/clnure/v20y2011i2p197-208.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Investigating the Reliability and Validity of the Waterlow Risk Assessment Scale: A Literature Review

Author

Listed:
  • Breda Walsh

    (The Mater Hospital, Dublin, Ireland)

  • Laura Dempsey

    (National University of Ireland, Galway, laura.dempsey@nuigalway.ie)

Abstract

The aim of this review was to examine health literature on the reliability and validity of the Waterlow pressure sore assessment scale. A systematic review of published studies relating to the topic was conducted and literature was examined for its relevancy to the topic under investigation. Findings suggest that despite the availability of over 40 assessment tools, the Waterlow assessment scale is the most frequently used by health care staff. Research suggests that the Waterlow Scale is an unreliable method of assessing individuals at risk of pressure sore development with all studies indicating a poor interrater reliability status. Its validity has also been criticized because of its high-sensitivity but low-specificity levels.

Suggested Citation

  • Breda Walsh & Laura Dempsey, 2011. "Investigating the Reliability and Validity of the Waterlow Risk Assessment Scale: A Literature Review," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 20(2), pages 197-208, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:20:y:2011:i:2:p:197-208
    DOI: 10.1177/1054773810389809
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1054773810389809
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1054773810389809?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:clnure:v:20:y:2011:i:2:p:197-208. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.