This site is intended for healthcare professionals

Sign in
Go to /sign-in page

You can view 5 more pages before signing in

Waterlow score

Authoring team

The Waterlow score permits patients to be classified according to their risk of developing a pressure sore (1).

The categories of risk factors are listed below:

  • weight for height
  • continence
  • skin condition
  • mobility
  • sex and age
  • appetite
  • special risks:
    • tissue condition and perfusion
    • neurological dysfunction
    • major surgery or trauma
    • medication

The score in each section is summated to give the overall score which indicates the relative risk:

  • 0-9 - low risk
  • 10-14 - at risk
  • 15-19 - high risk
  • 20+ - very high risk

A systematic review found that the Waterlow score offers a high sensitivity score (82.4%), but low specificity (27.4%), in the risk assessment of pressure ulcers (2).

Reference:

  1. Edwards M. The levels of reliability and validity of the Waterlow pressure sore risk calculator. Journal of Wound Care 1995;4( 8): 373– 378.
  2. Pancorbo-Hidalgo PL et al. Risk assessment scales for pressure ulcer prevention: a systematic review. J Adv Nurs. 2006 Apr;54(1):94-110.

Related pages

Create an account to add page annotations

Create a free account

Annotations allow you to add information to this page that would be handy to have on hand during a consultation. E.g. a website or number. This information will always show when you visit this page.

The content herein is provided for informational purposes and does not replace the need to apply professional clinical judgement when diagnosing or treating any medical condition. A licensed medical practitioner should be consulted for diagnosis and treatment of any and all medical conditions.

Connect

Copyright 2024 Oxbridge Solutions Limited, a subsidiary of OmniaMed Communications Limited. All rights reserved. Any distribution or duplication of the information contained herein is strictly prohibited. Oxbridge Solutions receives funding from advertising but maintains editorial independence.