The role community-based healthcare providers play in managing hard-to-heal wounds.

It is common for community-based healthcare providers (CHPs)-many of whom have not received specialised training in wound care-to deliver initial and ongoing management for various wound types and diverse populations. Wounds in any setting can rapidly transition to a stalled, hard-to-heal wound (HTHW) that is not following a normal healing trajectory. Failure to recognise or address issues that cause delayed healing can lead to increased costs, healthcare utilisation and suffering. To encourage early intervention by CHPs, a panel of wound care experts developed actionable evidence-based recommendations for CHPs delineating characteristics and appropriate care in identifying and treating HTHWs. A HTHW is a wound that fails to progress towards healing with standard therapy in an orderly and timely manner and should be referred to a qualified wound care provider (QWCP) for advanced assessment and diagnosis if not healed or reduced in size by 40%-50% within 4 weeks. HTHWs occur in patients with multiple comorbidities, and display increases in exudate, infection, devitalised tissue, maceration or pain, or no change in wound size. CHPs can play an important initial role by seeing the individual's HTHW risk, addressing local infection and providing an optimal wound environment. An easy-to-follow one-page table was developed for the CHP to systematically identify, evaluate and treat HTHWs, incorporating a basic toolkit with items easily obtainable in common office/clinic practice settings. A flow chart using visual HTHW clinical cues is also presented to address CHPs with different learning styles. These tools encourage delivery of appropriate early interventions that can improve overall healthcare efficiency and cost.

IWII Wound Infection in Clinical Practice consensus document: 2022 update.

ABSTRACT: Wound infection is a major challenge for clinicians globally, with accurate and timely identification of wound infection being critical to achieving clinical and cost-effective management, and promotion of healing. This paper presents an overview of the development of the International Wound Infection Institute (IWII)'s 2022 Wound Infection in Clinical Practice consensus document. The updated document summarises current evidence and provides multidisciplinary healthcare providers with effective guidance and support on terminology, paradigms related to biofilm, identification of wound infection, wound cleansing, debridement and antimicrobial stewardship. Integral to the update is revision of wound infection management strategies which are incorporated within the IWII's Wound Infection Continuum (IWII-WIC) and management plan. The aim of the 2022 IWII consensus document update was to provide an accessible and useful clinical resource in at least six languages, incorporating the latest evidence and current best practice for wound infection and prevention. Dissemination techniques for the consensus are discussed and highlighted.

Development and psychometric property testing of a skin tear knowledge assessment instrument (OASES) in 37 countries.

AIM: To develop and psychometrically evaluate a skin tear knowledge assessment instrument (OASES). DESIGN: Prospective psychometric instrument validation study. METHOD: The skin tear knowledge assessment instrument was developed based on a literature review and expert input (N = 19). Face and content validity were assessed in a two-round Delphi procedure by 10 international experts affiliated with the International Skin Tear Advisory Panel (ISTAP). The instrument was psychometrically tested in a convenience sample of 387 nurses in 37 countries (April-May 2020). Validity of the multiple-choice test items (item difficulty, discriminating index, quality of the response alternatives), construct validity, and test-retest reliability (stability) were analysed and evaluated in light of international reference standards. RESULTS: A 20-item instrument, covering six knowledge domains most relevant to skin tears, was designed. Content validity was established (CVI = 0.90-1.00). Item difficulty varied between 0.24 and 0.94 and the quality of the response alternatives between 0.01-0.52. The discriminating index was acceptable (0.19-0.77). Participants with a theoretically expected higher knowledge level had a significantly higher total score than participants with theoretically expected lower knowledge (p < .001). The 1-week test-retest intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.83 (95% CI = 0.78-0.86) for the full instrument and varied between 0.72 (95% CI = 0.64-0.79) and 0.85 (95% CI = 0.81-0.89) for the domains. Cohen's Kappa coefficients of the individual items ranged between 0.21 and 0.74. CONCLUSION: The skin tear knowledge assessment instrument is supported by acceptable psychometric properties and can be applied in nursing education, research, and practice to assess knowledge of healthcare professionals about skin tears. IMPACT: Prevention and treatment of skin tears are a challenge for healthcare professionals. The provision of adequate care is based on profound and up-to-date knowledge. None of the existing instruments to assess skin tear knowledge is psychometrically tested, nor up-to-date. OASES can be used worldwide to identify education, practice, and research needs and priorities related to skin tears in clinical practice.

Management of Nonhealable and Maintenance Wounds: A Systematic Integrative Review and Referral Pathway.

GENERAL PURPOSE: To synthesize the evidence regarding nonhealable and maintenance wound management and propose an interprofessional referral pathway for wound management. TARGET AUDIENCE: This continuing education activity is intended for physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and nurses with an interest in skin and wound care. LEARNING OBJECTIVES: After participating in this continuing professional development activity, the participant will apply knowledge gained to:1. Identify the ideas from the authors' systematic review that could prove useful in understanding nonhealable and maintenance wound management.2. Select evidence-based management strategies for nonhealable and maintenance wound management. ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVEThis systematic integrative review aims to identify, appraise, analyze, and synthesize evidence regarding nonhealable and maintenance wound management to guide clinical practice. An interprofessional referral pathway for wound management is proposed. DATA SOURCES: An electronic search of Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, Academic Search Ultimate, Africa-Wide Information, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature database with Full Text, Health Source: ConsumerEdition, Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition, and MEDLINE was conducted for publications from 2011 to 2019. Search terms included (nonhealable/nonhealing, chronic, stalled, recurring, delayed healing, hard-to-heal) and wound types most associated with nonhealable or maintenance wounds. Published studies were hand searched by the authors. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were appraised using two quality appraisal tools. Thirteen reviews, six best-practice guidelines, three consensus studies, and six original nonexperimental studies were selected. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted using a coding framework including treatment of underlying causes, patient-centered concerns, local wound care, alternative outcomes, health dialogue needs, challenges within resource restricted contexts, and prevention. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data were clustered by five wound types and local wound bed factors; further, commonalities were identified and reported as themes and subthemes. CONCLUSIONS: Strong evidence on the clinical management of nonhealable wounds is limited. Few studies describe outcomes specific to maintenance care. Patient-centered care, timely intervention by skilled healthcare providers, and involvement of the interprofessional team emerged as the central themes of effective management of maintenance and nonhealable wounds.

This systematic integrative review aims to identify, appraise, analyze, and synthesize evidence regarding nonhealable and maintenance wound management to guide clinical practice. An interprofessional referral pathway for wound management is proposed. An electronic search of Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, Academic Search Ultimate, Africa-Wide Information, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature database with Full Text, Health Source: Consumer Edition, Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition, and MEDLINE was conducted for publications from 2011 to 2019. Search terms included (nonhealable/nonhealing, chronic, stalled, recurring, delayed healing, hard-to-heal) and wound types most associated with nonhealable or maintenance wounds. Published studies were hand searched by the authors. Studies were appraised using two quality appraisal tools. Thirteen reviews, six best-practice guidelines, three consensus studies, and six original nonexperimental studies were selected. Data were extracted using a coding framework including treatment of underlying causes, patient-centered concerns, local wound care, alternative outcomes, health dialogue needs, challenges within resource restricted contexts, and prevention. Data were clustered by five wound types and local wound bed factors; further, commonalities were identified and reported as themes and subthemes. Strong evidence on the clinical management of nonhealable wounds is limited. Few studies describe outcomes specific to maintenance care. Patient-centered care, timely intervention by skilled healthcare providers, and involvement of the interprofessional team emerged as the central themes of effective management of maintenance and nonhealable wounds.

A regenerative approach to the pharmacological management of hard-to-heal wounds.

A wound is considered hard-to-heal when, despite the appropriate clinical analysis and intervention, the wound area reduces by less than a third at four weeks and complete healing fails to occur within 12 weeks. The most prevalent hard-to-heal wounds are associated with underlying metabolic diseases or vascular insufficiency and include arterial, venous, pressure and diabetic foot ulcers. Their common features include an abnormal immune response and extended inflammatory phase, a subdued proliferation phase due to cellular insufficiencies and finally an almost non-existent remodeling phase. Advances in wound care technology, tested in both pre-clinical models and clinical trials, have paved the way for improved treatment options, focused on regeneration. These interventions have been shown to limit the extent of ongoing inflammatory damage, decrease bacterial load, promote angiogenesis and deposition of granulation tissue, and stimulate keratinocyte migration thereby promoting re-epithelialization in these wounds. The current review discusses these hard-to-heal wounds in the context of their underlying pathology and potential of advanced treatment options, which if applied promptly as a standard of care, could reduce morbidity, promote quality of life, and alleviate the burden on a strained health system.