| 
IAD and Assessment and Diagnosis 
Careful 
assessment and clear diagnosis of IAD can be complex in patients with risk 
factors for skin conditions, including pressure ulcers. We will go into more 
detail in a few moments, but the main concepts that are important to address 
include the differentiation between ‘moisture-associated’ and 
‘incontinence-associated’ skin lesions and pressure ulcers. Misdiagnosis is 
fairly common, which can lead to some mismanagement issues that can prolong or 
worsen the condition. However, there is some cross-over in treatment strategies, 
so it is good to know that practice management recommendations suggest that if 
the diagnosis remains unclear, a standard set of skin care interventions can be 
instituted to help in managing either condition.  
				
					| 
						•Differentiate 
						between IAD and pressure ulcers 
						•Note 
						that misdiagnosis is common 
						•If 
						diagnosis remains unclear, standard skin care 
						interventions 
					
					should be implemented to manage both 
					conditions | 
					.h8.jpg) |  
Differentiation between pressure ulcers and moisture lesions 
The assessment 
of IAD start with a continence assessment, which should
include the frequency of incontinence, especially fecal incontinence with 
diarrhea. Other assessments to differentiate moisture lesions from pressure 
ulcers are shown in this table and include differentiating the cause, location, 
shape and edge, depth, and presence of necrosis. And it might sound obvious, but 
moisture lesions are associated with the presence of moisture. It’s amazing how 
often this goes unnoticed. And pressure ulcers are usually found in the presence 
of either pressure or shear over bony prominences. Pressure ulcers tend to have 
a distinct edge and shape with a deeper depth, while moisture lesions are more 
diffuse and usually superficial. And a sometimes While necrotic tissue may be 
present in a pressure ulcer, moisture ulcers are not associated with necrosis.   
Also, noting 
the presence of some other factors can be very important to differentiating 
pressure ulcers from IAD or other moisture lesions. These include the general 
condition of the skin, if the patient has compromised mobility, poor personal 
hygiene, reduced cognitive awareness, poor nutritional status, critical illness, 
or the use of antibiotic or immunosuppressive medications, all of which are risk 
factors. In addition, the assessment of pain, pyrexia, and the use of occlusive 
containment products for incontinence should be considered.   
Locations at 
higher risk for IAD include the perineum, peri-genital areas, buttocks, gluteal 
fold, thighs, lower back, lower abdomen and skinfolds that may be chronically 
exposed to moisture from urinary and fecal incontinence. Each of those areas can 
be assessed for the typical characteristics of IAD, including the presence of 
lesions, skin erosion, erythema, maceration, and signs of bacterial or fungal 
infection.  
			IAD prevention 
			and management 
The early 
detection of skin damage is key to 
integrating 
prevention measures into the treatment plan. And a single assessment 
isn’t enough. The clinical team and caregiver should continually 
assess 
the patient for skin damage in order to alter the treatment regimen to best 
prevent 
and manage IAD.  
	
		| 
		
		Prevention of skin damage 
			Continence assessment 
			and management 
			Skin care regimen and 
			products 
			Skin examination 
		Texture, 
		maceration, edema 
		Pain, 
		sensitivity 
		Temperature | 
		.h9.jpg) |  
Continence 
management to reduce leakage and other sources of skin exposure to urinary and 
fecal matter is the foundation for IAD prevention and treatment. If diarrhea 
incontinence cannot be resolved through the
reduction of risk factors, a 
good example of which is 
diarrhea associated with antibiotics, then it may be necessary to consider fecal 
management systems. The appropriate use and maintenance of continence devices, 
including pads, urinary sheaths, and stool diversion systems are important 
prevention and management interventions.  
If non-invasive 
interventions fail, a risk versus benefit analysis (with the risk being a 
potential catheter-associated urinary tract infection and the benefit being the 
reduced risk for IAD) may suggest the temporary use of indwelling catheters that 
can help to protect skin from urinary exposure. Good catheter management will 
minimize skin contact with urine. 
A structured 
skin care regimen should include skin cleansing, skin protection, and the 
restoration of the skin barrier function. New technologies introduced to body 
pads can draw excess fluids away from the skin to prevent occlusion and 
over-hydration of the stratum corneum. 
		 |