Background: Pressure ulcers (PU) affect millions of people worldwide and always occur over bony areas of the body where pressure and tissue distortion is greatest. The national pooled prevalence of pressure ulcer remains unknown. Hence, the aim of this meta-analysis was to determine the effect of position change on pressure ulcer among hospitalized clients in Ethiopia. Methods: Studies were retrieved through search engines in PubMed, Scopus, WHO afro library, Google Scholar, Africa journal online, PsycINFO and web-science following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P). Analysis was done using STATA version 14 software. We checked the between-study heterogeneity using the I² and examined a potential publication bias by visual inspection of the funnel plot and Egger’s regression test statistic. The random-effect model was fitted to estimate the summary effects, odds ratios (ORs), and 95% confidence interval (CIs) across studies. Results: Out of the reviewing 401 studies, 7 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The estimated pooled prevalence of pressure ulcer in Ethiopia was 11.7% (95% CI (7.28, 16.13%)). Based on the subgroup analysis, the estimated magnitude of pressure ulcer was 15.89% (95% CI: 35.34, 54.04) among studies their sample size were greater than or equals to 250. Those clients who have position change during hospitalization were 85% less likely to develop pressure ulcer [(OR 0.15, 95%CI (0.06, 0.4)] than their counter part. Conclusion: The overall prevalence of pressure ulcer in Ethiopia was relatively high. Position change of the client during hospitalization had paramount benefit to reduce the burden of pressure ulcer. Therefore, policymakers could give special attention to minimize the magnitude of pressure ulcer in order to improve the overall quality of healthcare service. Further meta-analysis study is need to identify individual and health care service related factors to the occurrence of pressure ulcer.

Background and objectives: The incidence of hip fractures in advanced age is increasing due to the aging society. In trochanteric region fractures of the femur, patient positioning can be performed various ways. The aim of this study is to clinically and radiologically compare the use of the supine hemilithotomy position, the lateral decubitus position, and the traction table when performing PFN surgery for femoral intertrochanteric fractures in the geriatric age group.Materials and Methods: A total of 170 older patients with femoral intertrochanteric fractures were included in this cross-sectional study. The patients were divided into three groups the supine hemilithotomy group, lateral decubitus group and fracture table. For the postoperative period, complications, length of stay in the intensive care unit, and length of stay in hospital were examined, while in postoperative radiographs, tip-apex distance (TAD), collodiaphyseal angle (CDA), and Cleveland-Bosworth quadrants were examined to evaluate the placement of the lag screw in the femoral head. Quality of fracture reduction was evaluated according to the modified Baumgaertner criteria.Results: The mean age of the patients was 77.77±8.8; 57.6% of patients were female. According to the modified Baumgaertner criteria, it was determined that patients with ‘poor’ reduction quality had an approximately ten times higher risk of cut-out than those with ‘good’ reduction quality. (OR = 10.111, p = 0.002, 95% confidence interval; 2.313-44.207). The duration of surgery of patient in the fracture table group was found to be higher than in the other groups, the CDA in the supine position group were found lower than in the other groups, and the TAD in the supine position group was found higher than in the other groups. Complications were mostly detected in patients who underwent surgery in the lateral decubitus position. (p<0,05) Conclusion: We believe that it is necessary to be familiar with all methods, since it is very difficult to choose the most appropriate method according to the surgeon’s experience, the hospital’s facilities and conditions, and the patient’s clinical status.