Skills on AI 459 skills

Active theme: Light

Integumentary Assessment

Use when asked to administer, score, or explain an Integumentary Assessment — skin/hair/nails evaluation combining a head-to-toe inspection with the Braden Scale for pressure ulcer risk — grounded in FormExamples/form-examples; related to waterlow-pressure-ulcer-risk-assessment and dermatology-assessment.

Structured integumentary (skin, hair, nails) clinical assessment combining a head-to-toe skin inspection with the Braden Scale for pressure ulcer risk and wound TIME assessment, to grade pressure-ulcer risk and characterize integumentary findings.

Scoring

Instrument: Braden Scale for Pressure Ulcer Risk. Range 6–23 — lower score means higher risk (the inverse of most clinical scales).

  • ≤ 9 — Very High Risk.
  • 10–12 — High Risk.
  • 13–14 — Moderate Risk.
  • 15–18 — Mild Risk.
  • 19–23 — No Risk.

What it covers

Demographics; presenting skin concern; skin inspection (colour, moisture, integrity, turgor, lesions); hair and scalp examination; nail examination; wound assessment (stage, TIME) if applicable; Braden Scale scoring (sensory, moisture, activity, mobility, nutrition, friction/shear); photography and documentation; and clinical impression with a care plan.

Relationship to other assessments

This shares pressure-ulcer risk scoring territory with Waterlow Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment — the Braden Scale used here is inverted relative to Waterlow (lower Braden = worse risk; higher Waterlow = worse risk), so never compare the two scores directly without converting to risk band first. For skin-quality-of-life focus specifically, see Dermatology Assessment.

Common pitfalls

  • Confusing Braden's inverted scale with a normal higher-is-worse scale — this is the single most consequential mistake when working across both this assessment and Waterlow; always interpret via the named risk band, not the raw number, when comparing across instruments.
  • Assessing skin only where a wound is already present — the head-to-toe inspection exists specifically to catch pressure damage or skin changes before they progress to an open wound.
  • Skipping photography/documentation for a stable-looking wound — photographic documentation over time is what actually shows whether a wound is healing, static, or deteriorating; verbal description alone is much harder to compare across visits.

Learn more

View integumentary-assessment/SKILL.md on GitHub