Acute wound management: revisiting the approach to assessment, irrigation, and closure considerations

Abstract Background As millions of emergency department (ED) visits each year include wound care, emergency care providers must remain experts in acute wound management. The variety of acute wounds presenting to the ED challenge the physician to select the most appropriate management to facilitate healing. A complete wound history along with anatomic and specific medical considerations for each patient provides the basis of decision making for wound management. It is essential to apply an evidence‐based approach and consider each wound individually in order to create the optimal conditions for wound healing. Aims A comprehensive evidence‐based approach to acute wound management is an essential skill set for any emergency physician or acute care practitioner. This review provides an overview of current evidence and addresses frequent pitfalls. Methods A systematic review of the literature for acute wound management was performed. Results A structured MEDLINE search was performed regarding acute wound management including established wound care guidelines. The data obtained provided the framework for evidence‐based recommendations and current best practices for wound care. Conclusion Acute wound management varies based on the wound location and characteristics. No single approach can be applied to all wounds; however, a systematic approach to acute wound care integrated with current best practices provides the framework for exceptional wound management

Cultural adaptation, content validity and inter-rater reliability of the "STAR Skin Tear Classification System"

AIMS: to perform the cultural adaptation of the STAR Skin Tear Classification System into the Portuguese language and to test the content validity and inter-rater reliability of the adapted version.METHODS: methodological study with a quantitative approach. The cultural adaptation was developed in three phases: translation, evaluation by a committee of judges and back-translation. The instrument was tested regarding content validity and inter-rater reliability.RESULTS: the adapted version obtained a regular level of concordance when it was applied by nurses using photographs of friction injuries. Regarding its application in clinical practice, the adapted version obtained a moderate and statistically significant level of concordance.CONCLUSION: the study tested the content validity and inter-rater reliability of the version adapted into the Portuguese language. Its inclusion in clinical practice will enable the correct identification of this type of injury, as well as the implementation of protocols for the prevention and treatment of friction injuries

Feasibility Study: Assessing the Efficacy and Social Acceptability of Using Dental Hygiene-Therapists as Front-Line Clinicians

BackgroundThe oral health of the adult population has been improving in the United Kingdom decade upon decade. Over half of dental service activity in the National Health Service (NHS) is limited to a “check-up” without any further treatment. This raises a question as to whether “check-ups” could be provided by Dental Hygieneist-Therapists, rather than General Dental Practitioners. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of a definitive trial to evaluate the costs and effects of using Dental-Hygieneist-Therapists to undertake the “check-up”.Methods/Design Adult NHS patients were randomised into three arms in two dental practices: patients who only saw Dental Hygieneist-Therapists for a “check-up”, those that saw the General Dental Practitioner and Dental Hygieneist-Therapist alternatively and a control, where patients only saw the General Dental Practitioner for their “check-up”. The study ran for 15 months. The primary outcome measures of the study were patient recruitment, retention and fidelity. A parallel and embedded qualitative study was undertaken which recorded the views of participating patients to determine the social acceptability of the intervention. ResultsSixty patients participated in the study. The initial recruitment rate for the study was 33.7%. This figure increased to over 82.1% when telephone calls or face-to-face recruitment was utilised. The retention rates were 60.0% for both the Dental Hygieneist-Therapist only group and the alternate General Dental Practitioner and Dental Hygieneist-Therapist group, compared to 70.0% for the General Dental Practitioner only group. Fifteen patients were interviewed in the qualitative study and supported a team approach to the provision of “check-ups” in the NHS. ConclusionThis study demonstrates the feasibility of a definitive trial to evaluate the costs and effects of using Dental-Hygieneist-Therapists to undertake the “check-up”.<br/

Can the feedback of patient assessments, brief training, or their combination, improve the interpersonal skills of primary care physicians? A systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Improving quality of primary care is a key focus of international health policy. Current quality improvement efforts place a large focus on technical, clinical aspects of quality, but a comprehensive approach to quality improvement should also include interpersonal care. Two methods of improving the quality of interpersonal care in primary care have been proposed. One involves the feedback of patient assessments of interpersonal care to physicians, and the other involves brief training and education programmes. This study therefore reviewed the efficacy of (i) feedback of real patient assessments of interpersonal care skills, (ii) brief training focused on the improvement of interpersonal care (iii) interventions combining both (i) and (ii)</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Three electronic databases were searched (CENTRAL, Medline and Embase) and augmented by searches of the bibliographies of retrieved articles. The quality of studies was appraised and results summarised in narrative form.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Nine studies were included (two patient based feedback studies and seven brief training studies). Of the two feedback studies, one reported a significant positive effect. Only one training study reported a significant positive effect.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>There is limited evidence concerning the effects of patient based feedback. There is reasonable evidence that brief training as currently delivered is not effective, although the evidence is not definitive, due to the small number of trials and the variation in the training methods and goals. The lack of effectiveness of these methods may reflect a number of issues, such as differences in the effectiveness of the interventions in experienced practitioners and those in training, the lack of theory linking feedback to behaviour change, failure to provide sufficient training or to use a comprehensive range of behaviour change techniques. Further research into both feedback and brief training interventions is required before these interventions are routinely introduced to improve patient satisfaction with interpersonal care in primary care. The interventions to be tested in future research should consider using insights from the wider literature on communication outside primary care, might benefit from a clearer theoretical basis, and should examine the use of combined brief training and feedback.</p

Financial incentives for return of service in underserved areas: a systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In many geographic regions, both in developing and in developed countries, the number of health workers is insufficient to achieve population health goals. Financial incentives for return of service are intended to alleviate health worker shortages: A (future) health worker enters into a contract to work for a number of years in an underserved area in exchange for a financial pay-off.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We carried out systematic literature searches of PubMed, the Excerpta Medica database, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the National Health Services Economic Evaluation Database for studies evaluating outcomes of financial-incentive programs published up to February 2009. To identify articles for review, we combined three search themes (health workers or students, underserved areas, and financial incentives). In the initial search, we identified 10,495 unique articles, 10,302 of which were excluded based on their titles or abstracts. We conducted full-text reviews of the remaining 193 articles and of 26 additional articles identified in reference lists or by colleagues. Forty-three articles were included in the final review. We extracted from these articles information on the financial-incentive programs (name, location, period of operation, objectives, target groups, definition of underserved area, financial incentives and obligation) and information on the individual studies (authors, publication dates, types of study outcomes, study design, sample criteria and sample size, data sources, outcome measures and study findings, conclusions, and methodological limitations). We reviewed program results (descriptions of recruitment, retention, and participant satisfaction), program effects (effectiveness in influencing health workers to provide care, to remain, and to be satisfied with work and personal life in underserved areas), and program impacts (effectiveness in influencing health systems and health outcomes).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 43 reviewed studies 34 investigated financial-incentive programs in the US. The remaining studies evaluated programs in Japan (five studies), Canada (two), New Zealand (one) and South Africa (one). The programs started between 1930 and 1998. We identified five different types of programs (service-requiring scholarships, educational loans with service requirements, service-option educational loans, loan repayment programs, and direct financial incentives). Financial incentives to serve for one year in an underserved area ranged from year-2000 United States dollars 1,358 to 28,470. All reviewed studies were observational. The random-effects estimate of the pooled proportion of all eligible program participants who had either fulfilled their obligation or were fulfilling it at the time of the study was 71% (95% confidence interval 60–80%). Seven studies compared retention in the <it>same </it>(underserved) area between program participants and non-participants. Six studies found that participants were less likely than non-participants to remain in the same area (five studies reported the difference to be statistically significant, while one study did not report a significance level); one study did not find a significant difference in retention in the same area. Thirteen studies compared provision of care or retention in <it>any </it>underserved area between participants and non-participants. Eleven studies found that participants were more likely to (continue to) practice in any underserved area (nine studies reported the difference to be statistically significant, while two studies did not provide the results of a significance test); two studies found that program participants were significantly less likely than non-participants to remain in any underserved area. Seven studies investigated the satisfaction of participants with their work and personal lives in underserved areas.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Financial-incentive programs for return of service are one of the few health policy interventions intended to improve the distribution of human resources for health on which substantial evidence exists. However, the majority of studies are from the US, and only one study reports findings from a developing country, limiting generalizability. The existing studies show that financial-incentive programs have placed substantial numbers of health workers in underserved areas and that program participants are more likely than non-participants to work in underserved areas in the long run, even though they are less likely to remain at the site of original placement. As none of the existing studies can fully rule out that the observed differences between participants and non-participants are due to selection effects, the evidence to date does not allow the inference that the programs have caused increases in the supply of health workers to underserved areas.</p

A mixed methods pilot study with a cluster randomized control trial to evaluate the impact of a leadership intervention on guideline implementation in home care nursing

Abstract Background Foot ulcers are a significant problem for people with diabetes. Comprehensive assessments of risk factors associated with diabetic foot ulcer are recommended in clinical guidelines to decrease complications such as prolonged healing, gangrene and amputations, and to promote effective management. However, the translation of clinical guidelines into nursing practice remains fragmented and inconsistent, and a recent homecare chart audit showed less than half the recommended risk factors for diabetic foot ulcers were assessed, and peripheral neuropathy (the most significant predictor of complications) was not assessed at all. Strong leadership is consistently described as significant to successfully transfer guidelines into practice. Limited research exists however regarding which leadership behaviours facilitate and support implementation in nursing. The purpose of this pilot study is to evaluate the impact of a leadership intervention in community nursing on implementing recommendations from a clinical guideline on the nursing assessment and management of diabetic foot ulcers. Methods Two phase mixed methods design is proposed (ISRCTN 12345678). Phase I: Descriptive qualitative to understand barriers to implementing the guideline recommendations, and to inform the intervention. Phase II: Matched pair cluster randomized controlled trial (n = 4 centers) will evaluate differences in outcomes between two implementation strategies. Primary outcome: Nursing assessments of client risk factors, a composite score of 8 items based on Diabetes/Foot Ulcer guideline recommendations. Intervention: In addition to the organization's 'usual' implementation strategy, a 12 week leadership strategy will be offered to managerial and clinical leaders consisting of: a) printed materials, b) one day interactive workshop to develop a leadership action plan tailored to barriers to support implementation; c) three post-workshop teleconferences. Discussion This study will provide vital information on which leadership strategies are well received to facilitate and support guideline implementation. The anticipated outcomes will provide information to assist with effective management of foot ulcers for people with diabetes. By tracking clinical outcomes associated with guideline implementation, health care administrators will be better informed to influence organizational and policy decision-making to support evidence-based quality care. Findings will be useful to inform the design of future multi-centered trials on various clinical topics to enhance knowledge translation for positive outcomes. Trial Registration Current Control Trials ISRCTN0691089

Effectiveness of papain gel in venous ulcer treatment: randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE: to assess the effectiveness of 2% papain gel compared to 2% carboxymethyl cellulose in the treatment of chronic venous ulcer patients.METHOD: randomized controlled clinical trial with 12-week follow-up. The sample consisted of 18 volunteers and 28 venous ulcers. In the trial group, 2% papain gel was used and, in the control group, 2% carboxymethyl cellulose gel.RESULTS: the trial group showed a significant reduction in the lesion area, especially between the fifth and twelfth week of treatment, with two healed ulcers and a considerable increase in the amount of epithelial tissue in the wound bed.CONCLUSION: 2% papain gel demonstrated greater effectiveness in the reduction of the lesion area, but was similar to 2% carboxymethyl cellulose gel regarding the reduction in the amount of exudate and devitalized tissue. Multicenter research is suggested to evidence the effectiveness of 2% papain gel in the healing of venous ulcers. UTN number: U1111-1157-299