M.O.I.S.T. Concept for the Local Therapy of Chronic Wounds: An International Update.

Chronic wounds remain a significant clinical challenge both for those affected and for healthcare systems. The treatment is often comprised and complex. All patients should receive wound care that is integrated into a holistic approach involving local management that addresses the underlying etiology and provides for gold standard therapy to support healing, avoid complications and be more cost effective. There have been significant advances in medicine over the last few decades. The development of new technologies and therapeutics for the local treatment of wounds is also constantly increasing. To help standardize clinical practice with regard to the multitude of wound products, the M.O.I.S.T. concept was developed by a multidisciplinary expert group. The M stands for moisture balance, O for oxygen balance, I for infection control, S for supporting strategies, and T for tissue management. Since the M.O.I.S.T. concept, which originated in the German-speaking countries, is now intended to provide healthcare professionals with an adapted instrument to be used in clinical practice, and a recent update to the concept has been undertaken by a group of interdisciplinary experts to align it with international standards. The M.O.I.S.T. concept can now be used internationally both as an educational tool and for the practical implementation of modern local treatment concepts for patients with chronic wounds and can also be used in routine clinical practice.

What is slough? Defining the proteomic and microbial composition of slough and its implications for wound healing.

Slough is a well-known feature of non-healing wounds. This pilot study aims to determine the proteomic and microbiologic components of slough as well as interrogate the associations between wound slough components and wound healing. Ten subjects with slow-to-heal wounds and visible slough were enrolled. Aetiologies included venous stasis ulcers, post-surgical site infections and pressure ulcers. Patient co-morbidities and wound healing outcome at 3-months post-sample collection was recorded. Debrided slough was analysed microscopically, through untargeted proteomics, and high-throughput bacterial 16S-ribosomal gene sequencing. Microscopic imaging revealed wound slough to be amorphous in structure and highly variable. 16S-profiling found slough microbial communities to associate with wound aetiology and location on the body. Across all subjects, slough largely consisted of proteins involved in skin structure and formation, blood-clot formation and immune processes. To predict variables associated with wound healing, protein, microbial and clinical datasets were integrated into a supervised discriminant analysis. This analysis revealed that healing wounds were enriched for proteins involved in skin barrier development and negative regulation of immune responses. While wounds that deteriorated over time started off with a higher baseline Bates-Jensen Wound Assessment Score and were enriched for anaerobic bacterial taxa and chronic inflammatory proteins. To our knowledge, this is the first study to integrate clinical, microbiome, and proteomic data to systematically characterise wound slough and integrate it into a single assessment to predict wound healing outcome. Collectively, our findings underscore how slough components can help identify wounds at risk of continued impaired healing and serves as an underutilised biomarker.

Fluid handling by foam wound dressings: From engineering theory to advanced laboratory performance evaluations.

This article describes the contemporary bioengineering theory and practice of evaluating the fluid handling performance of foam-based dressings, with focus on the important and clinically relevant engineering structure-function relationships and on advanced laboratory testing methods for pre-clinical quantitative assessments of this common type of wound dressings. The effects of key wound dressing material-related and treatment-related physical factors on the absorbency and overall fluid handling of foam-based dressings are thoroughly and quantitively analysed. Discussions include exudate viscosity and temperature, action of mechanical forces and the dressing microstructure and associated interactions. Based on this comprehensive review, we propose a newly developed testing method, experimental metrics and clinical benchmarks that are clinically relevant and can set the standard for robust fluid handling performance evaluations. The purpose of this evaluative framework is to translate the physical characteristics and performance determinants of a foam dressing into achievable best clinical outcomes. These guiding principles are key to distinguishing desirable properties of a dressing that contribute to optimal performance in clinical settings.

Clinical performance characteristics for bordered foam dressings in the treatment of complex wounds: An international wound dressing technology expert panel review.

The aim of this article is to identify and describe clinical practice performance characteristics for bordered foam dressings in the treatment of complex wounds. Our recently published systematic review of outcomes and applied measurement instruments for the use of bordered foam dressings in complex wounds has led to us identifying a range of important clinical and patient-centred issues related to this dressing class. Specifically, here, we focus on an overview of performance criteria in the areas of application, adhesion, exudate management and debridement functions of bordered foam dressings. Our hope is that by highlighting the clinical performance criteria, future testing standards for wound dressings will more closely match our clinical expectations and, thereby, assist clinicians to make better wound treatment choices based on meaningful and clinically relevant dressing product performance standards. complex wounds, complex wound care, treatment, bordered foam dressings, dressing performance.

The development of a core outcome set for clinical effectiveness studies of bordered foam dressings in the treatment of complex wounds.

AIM: The aim of this project was to develop a core outcome set (COS) for clinical effectiveness studies of bordered foam dressings in the treatment of complex wounds. METHODS: The research project followed the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative and consisted of two phases. The first phase prepared the background and process, while the second phase had three steps: outcome list generation via systematic review and qualitative study, Delphi consensus study, and consensus meeting. The study has been registered in the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials database. RESULTS: The systematic review resulted in 82 outcomes and 20 additional outcomes were obtained during the interviews. After refinement, 111 panellists from 23 countries rated a list of 51 outcomes. In the following consensus meeting, six outcomes were prioritized to be included in the core outcome set. After the consensus meeting, a patient-reported outcome was added to the core outcome set. CONCLUSION: The COS for evaluating the effectiveness of bordered foam dressings in treating complex wounds includes 7 outcomes: "ability to stay in place", "leakage", "pain", "dressing related periwound skin changes", "change in wound size over time", and "overall satisfaction". These identified outcomes are correlated with contemporary bioengineering testing and evaluation methods for dressing performance, which underpins the need for a close multidisciplinary collaboration to advance the field of wound dressings. The outcome 'overall satisfaction' reflects the impact of complex wounds and their treatment on a patient's daily life. The use of these outcomes is recommended to improve data synthesis and promote evidence-based practice. Future developments in COS development involve creating measurement instruments and relevant endpoints for these outcomes.

Mechanical and contact characteristics of foam materials within wound dressings: Theoretical and practical considerations in treatment.

In the treatment of acute and chronic wounds, the clinical performance of a given foam-based dressing, and, ultimately, the wound healing and cost of care outcomes are strongly influenced by the mechanical performance of the foam material/s within that dressing. Most aspects of the mechanical performance of foam materials, for example, their stiffness, frictional properties, conformability, swelling characteristics and durability, and the overall mechanical protection provided by a foam-based dressing to a wound strongly depend on the microstructure of the foam components, particularly on their microtopography, density and porosity. This article, therefore, provides, for the first time, a comprehensive, self-inclusive compilation of clinically relevant theoretical and practical considerations, based on published analytical and experimental research as well as clinical experience related to the mechanical performance of foams in foam-based wound dressings. The current bioengineering information is useful for establishing understanding of the importance of mechanical properties of foams in foam-based dressings among clinicians and researchers in industry and academia, and other potential stakeholders in the wound care field, for example, regulators and buyers. This information is also particularly important for the development of standardised test methods for the evaluation of foam-based wound dressings and resulting standard mechanical performance metrics for these dressings.

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.

Establishing a consensus on wound infection definitions.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to establish an international, interorganisational consensus on wound infection terminology. METHODS: This project consisted of definition scoping and a Delphi process to produce a consensus glossary for 18 wound infection terms. Recent guidelines/consensus documents were reviewed to identify 2-4 definitions for each term. An online consensus process was undertaken using the RAND Appropriateness Method, a consensus method for panels to reach agreement. International wound organisations nominated experts to participate, from whom 21 participants were selected to represent different organisations, geographic regions and disciplines. In the first consensus round, each term was presented alongside 2-3 definitions and participants nominated their preferred definition, with the majority vote used to select a baseline definition. The consensus process then proceeded, with participants using a 9-point Likert scale to score their level of agreement or disagreement with the definition for each term. Participants also provided a justification outlining the reason behind their rating. At the end of each round, an index was calculated to provide a quantitative evaluation indicating whether agreement or disagreement had been reached. RESULTS: Reasoning statements were summarised and the definitions were adjusted to incorporate concepts identified by participants. The adjusted definition was presented in the next consensus round, together with the reasoning statements. Terms for which a final definition was not achieved in three consensus rounds were finalised with preferential voting using 2-3 definitions that had reached consensus. PROJECT PROGRESS AND SIGNIFICANCE: The project generated a glossary of wound infection terms, endorsed through participation of 15 international organisations, for dissemination of guidelines and clinical decision-making/teaching tools.

Clinical research on the use of bordered foam dressings in the treatment of complex wounds: A systematic review of reported outcomes and applied measurement instruments.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review article was to identify reported outcomes and measurement instruments used in clinical research on bordered foam dressings in the treatment of complex wounds. METHODS: MEDLINE (PubMed interface), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library were systematically searched using a combination of key terms including; wounds, bordered foam dressing, and treatment. Studies were included if they (1) targeted an adult population, (2) addressed the treatment of complex wounds with a bordered foam dressing as the primary wound dressing, (3) were retrieved from original research, and (4) were published between 2000 and 2022. There were no restrictions on language or study design. Studies that focused primarily on the prevention of complex wounds were excluded. Data extraction included outcome domains, outcomes, instruments, time points, and outcome measures. The OMERACT Filter 2.0 was used as a conceptual framework for the extraction of outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 24 outcome domains and 82 outcomes were identified. The outcomes were categorised into five core areas: (1) impact on life, (2) dressing performance, (3) pathophysiological manifestations, (4) resource use, and (5) adverse events. Thirtynine outcomes (47.0%) were measured at more than one time point. The most frequently reported time point was 'at the end of treatment' (62.7%). Outcomes were measured using self-report instruments, clinical observations, and bio-physiological instruments. CONCLUSION: This systematic review identified reported outcomes and measurement instruments in research on bordered foam dressings in the treatment of complex wounds. The variety and lack of consistency in terms of instruments, time points and outcome measurements made it difficult to compare data directly across different reported studies. A solution to the variety in outcome reporting across studies in complex wound care, and moreover for the treatment with bordered foam dressings, is the development of a Core Outcome Set (COS). The outcomes in this review article will inform the next steps of developing a COS, where patients, clinicians and researchers will be involved to decide on the final outcomes included in a COS for the treatment of complex wounds with bordered foam dressings.

Australian guideline on wound healing interventions to enhance healing of foot ulcers: part of the 2021 Australian evidence-based guidelines for diabetes-related foot disease.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes-related foot ulceration (DFU) has a substantial burden on both individuals and healthcare systems both globally and in Australia. There is a pressing need for updated guidelines on wound healing interventions to improve outcomes for people living with DFU. A national expert panel was convened to develop new Australian evidence-based guidelines on wound healing interventions for people with DFU by adapting suitable international guidelines to the Australian context. METHODS: The panel followed National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) procedures to adapt suitable international guidelines by the International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) to the Australian context. The panel systematically screened, assessed and judged all IWGDF wound healing recommendations using ADAPTE and GRADE frameworks for adapting guidelines to decide which recommendations should be adopted, adapted or excluded in the Australian context. Each recommendation had their wording, quality of evidence, and strength of recommendation re-evaluated, plus rationale, justifications and implementation considerations provided for the Australian context. This guideline underwent public consultation, further revision and approval by ten national peak bodies. RESULTS: Thirteen IWGDF wound healing recommendations were evaluated in this process. After screening, nine recommendations were adopted and four were adapted after full assessment. Two recommendations had their strength of recommendations downgraded, one intervention was not currently approved for use in Australia, one intervention specified the need to obtain informed consent to be acceptable in Australia, and another was reworded to clarify best standard of care. Overall, five wound healing interventions have been recommended as having the evidence-based potential to improve wound healing in specific types of DFU when used in conjunction with other best standards of DFU care, including sucrose-octasulfate impregnated dressing, systemic hyperbaric oxygen therapy, negative pressure wound therapy, placental-derived products, and the autologous combined leucocyte, platelet and fibrin dressing. The six new guidelines and the full protocol can be found at: https://diabetesfeetaustralia.org/new-guidelines/ CONCLUSIONS: The IWGDF guideline for wound healing interventions has been adapted to suit the Australian context, and in particular for geographically remote and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. This new national wound healing guideline, endorsed by ten national peak bodies, also highlights important considerations for implementation, monitoring, and future research priorities in Australia.

Embedding Wound Hygiene into a proactive wound healing strategy.

FOREWORD. WOUND HYGIENE: THE NEXT STAGE: Since a panel published the first consensus document on Wound Hygiene in March 2020, there has been a flurry of activity in support of this newly established concept in proactive wound healing.1 The document concluded that all wounds, particularly hard-to-heal ones, will benefit from Wound Hygiene, which should be initiated at the first referral, following a full holistic assessment to identify the wound aetiology and comorbidities, and then implemented at every dressing change until full healing occurs.1 The consensus has since been bolstered by educational webinars; competency-based skills training and support; development of international Wound Hygiene ambassadors; a survey of 1478 respondents, published in July 2021;2 and a case study supplement, published in January 2022, featuring a range of wound types, anatomies and underlying conditions on the improvements in wound-healing progress that can be achieved.3 Wound Hygiene has gained its own identity and is now a term in and of itself, that encompasses a 4-step protocol of care. It is an antibiofilm approach that is increasingly being used across wound care. The results of the survey2 were particularly encouraging for seeing how far Wound Hygiene has come, and how quickly: More than half (57.4%) had heard of the concept of Wound Hygiene Of those, 75.3% have implemented Wound Hygiene Overall, following implementation of Wound Hygiene, 80.3% of respondents reported improved healing rates.2 However, the top three barriers identified by the survey-lack of confidence, competence and research data-show that there is more to be done to support Wound Hygiene in practice.2 As a result, a consensus panel of international key opinion leaders convened virtually in the summer of 2021 to discuss what has been done so far, the outputs of the survey, and ideas for addressing the unmet needs identified by the results. The result is this publication, which represents an addendum to the initial consensus document, broadening support for implementation of Wound Hygiene. This document will reflect on the reasons Wound Hygiene has been successful in its first two years of implementation, reiterating its DNA: Do not wait to treat hard-to-heal wounds Use a simple 4-step approach Enable all healthcare professionals to implement and use Wound Hygiene. The document will also discuss the evolution of the Wound Hygiene concept, focusing on how and when to implement Wound Hygiene on all tissue types of hard-to-heal wounds, and proposing what these are. The panel has expanded the framework in which Wound Hygiene is used, with the ultimate objective of introducing the concept of 'embedding Wound Hygiene intro a proactive wound healing strategy.' Key inefficiencies are often observed along the journeys of people living with hard-to-heal wounds. The limited number of specialised healthcare professionals and the resulting delays in reaching them may increase the likelihood of a hard-to-heal wound developing. In a world where so much is happening so quickly that we may, at times, feel powerless to drive change, the panel wants to provide further guidance to propel the use of Wound Hygiene. The concept of Wound Hygiene is resonating, and the panel wants you to know that in whatever region you work, in whatever area of clinical practice, you are enabled to make this change. Wielding the 4-step Wound Hygiene protocol consistently is a key action every healthcare professional in every care setting can take to tackle the global wound care crisis. Wound Hygiene has taken off-now, where do we want to land? In a place where Wound Hygiene is practised on all wounds, at every stage, until healing. The panel once again recognises that the community of global healthcare providers should consider their local standards and guidelines when applying the recommendations of this document. To this end, the panel has created a flexible 3-phase framework that situates Wound Hygiene as integral to proactive wound healing. The panel hopes you will continue to implement Wound Hygiene and see the benefits it can bring to people living with wounds, as well as those who care for them.

Encuesta sobre la higiene de las heridas: conocimiento, implementación, obstáculos y resultados.

OBJETIVO: Se ha desarrollado una encuesta para comprender el conocimiento y la implementación actual del concepto de higiene de las heridas un año después de su difusión. También se analizaron los obstáculos para su implementación y los resultados. MÉTODO: La revista Journal of Wound Care (JWC), con la colaboración de ConvaTec, desarrolló una encuesta de 26 preguntas, compuesta por respuestas de opción múltiple y texto libre, que distribuyó globalmente por correo electrónico y en línea; la encuesta estuvo abierta unas 12 semanas. Debido a la naturaleza exploratoria de la investigación, se utilizó una técnica de muestreo no probabilístico. Los autores analizaron los resultados de la encuesta para sacar conclusiones de los datos. RESULTADOS: Un total de 1478 participantes dio su consentimiento para el uso de sus datos combinados anonimizados. Casi el 90% era de Estados Unidos o el Reino Unido. La mayoría se desempeñaba como especialista en el cuidado de las heridas y estaba distribuido equitativamente entre centros de atención primaria y hospitales de agudos. El 66,6% había trabajado en el área de cuidado de las heridas durante más de 8 años. Los encuestados trabajaban con una amplia variedad de tipos de heridas. Más de la mitad (57,4%) había oído hablar del concepto de higiene de las heridas, y entre ellos, el 75,3% la había implementado; el 78,7% respondió que la aplicaba "siempre", mientras que el 20,8% lo hacía "a veces". Los tres principales obstáculos para su adopción fueron la confianza (39,0%), el deseo de que haya más estudios sobre la higiene de las heridas (25,7%) y la competencia (24,8%). En general, tras la implementación de la higiene de las heridas, el 80,3% informó que las tasas de cicatrización de sus pacientes habían mejorado. CONCLUSIÓN: Los encuestados estuvieron totalmente de acuerdo en que la implementación de la higiene de las heridas es un método exitoso para el tratamiento del biofilm y un componente fundamental para mejorar las tasas de cicatrización en heridas de difícil cicatrización. Sin embargo, los obstáculos para su adopción e implementación demuestran que se necesitan cursos integrales de educación y capacitación, apoyo institucional para los cambios de política, protocolos, y más estudios clínicos para promover la higiene de las heridas.

Wound hygiene survey: awareness, implementation, barriers and outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has resulted in changes to caseload management, access to training and education, and other additional pressures, a survey was developed to understand current awareness and implementation of the wound hygiene concept into practice one year on from its dissemination. Barriers to implementation and outcomes were also surveyed. METHOD: The 26-question survey, a mixture of multiple choice and free-text, was developed by the Journal of Wound Care projects team, in consultation with ConvaTec, and distributed globally via email and online; the survey was open for just over 12 weeks. Due to the exploratory nature of the research, non-probability sampling was used. The authors reviewed the outputs of the survey to draw conclusions from the data, with the support of a medical writer. RESULTS: There were 1478 respondents who agreed to the use of their anonymised aggregated data. Nearly 90% were from the US or UK, and the majority worked in wound care specialist roles, equally distributed between community and acute care settings; 66.6% had been in wound care for more than 8 years. The respondents work across the spectrum of wound types. More than half (57.4%) had heard of the concept of wound hygiene, of whom 75.3% have implemented it; 78.7% answered that they 'always' apply wound hygiene and 20.8% 'sometimes' do so. The top three barriers to adoption were confidence (39.0%), the desire for more research (25.7%) and competence (24.8%). Overall, following implementation of wound hygiene, 80.3% reported that their patients' healing rates had improved. CONCLUSION: Respondents strongly agreed that implementing wound hygiene is a successful approach for biofilm management and a critical component for improving wound healing rates in hard-to-heal wounds. However, the barriers to its uptake and implementation demonstrate that comprehensive education and training, institutional support for policy and protocol changes, and more clinical research are needed to support wound hygiene.

Ultrasonic-assisted wound debridement: report from a closed panel meeting.

Mechanical debridement can be considered as an alternative to surgical debridement if surgery is not available, or is considered impractical or too high risk. One form of selective mechanical debridement is ultrasonic-assisted wound (UAW) debridement. As the published evidence on this is limited, a closed international expert meeting was held to review the existing evidence base on it, present preliminary findings of research currently in progress and discuss individual cases selected from the clinical experts' own practice. The panel also explored the potential barriers to the implementation of UAW debridement and how these might be addressed. It concluded there is sufficient evidence that UAW debridement is an effective method of cleansing and debriding almost all hard-to-heal wounds. Patients who are most likely to benefit from it are not medically stable, on anticoagulants, unable to visit a hospital for wound treatment, and/or have wounds with a poor vascular supply or are close to critical structures. The panel also observed that UAW debridement can be used to prepare the wound for negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) or as an adjunctive to it. Given the potential to experience pain during the procedure, the panel considered that patients will benefit from topical analgesia. The panel noted that health professionals, patients and visitors must be protected from the aerosolisation associated with UAW, to reduce risk of cross-contamination.

Clinical indicators of wound infection and biofilm: reaching international consensus.

OBJECTIVE: To achieve international consensus relating to clinical indicators for a chronic wound, wound infection and biofilm presence to inform the development of international clinical guidance for assessing and managing wound infection. METHOD: An online Delphi consensus process of international key opinion leaders in infection was undertaken. A literature search underpinned the development of issue statements related to terminology, emerging topics and debate in the field of wound infection. Experts participated in three rounds of consensus voting, sharing their opinions and indicating their level of agreement with the issue statements. Votes were calculated using web-based software that implements a nominal group voting methodology previously published by Research and Development/University of California at Los Angeles. RESULTS: A total of 14 experts took part in the development process. Consensus was reached on clinical indicators of wound chronicity, wound infection and biofilm presence. Agreement was also reached that the term 'critical colonisation' should no longer be used to refer to a stage in the wound infection continuum. CONCLUSION: Outcomes from the consensus process were used to inform the development of international, evidence-informed guidance on the assessment and treatment of wound infection to promote improved outcomes for people with wounds.

TIME CDST: an updated tool to address the current challenges in wound care.

Despite the understanding that wounds are a common problem affecting the individual, the health service and society as a whole, there continues to be a lack of a systematic, structured, evidence-based approach to wound management. The TIME principle was first published in 2003, 1 and has since been integrated by many into clinical practice and research. However, this tool has been criticised for its tendency to focus mainly on the wound rather than on the wider issues that the patient is presenting with. At an expert meeting held in London in 2018, this conundrum was addressed and the TIME clinical decision support tool (CDST) was elaborated upon. This article introduces the TIME CDST, explains why it is required and describes how its use is likely to benefit patients, clinicians and health-service organisations. It also explores the framework in detail, and shows why this simple and accessible framework is robust enough to facilitate consistency in the delivery of wound care and better patient outcomes. Finally, it outlines the next steps for the rollout, use and evaluation of the impact of the TIME CDST.

Technological features of advanced skin protectants and an examination of the evidence base.

Products that provide a protective skin barrier play a vital role in defending the skin against the corrosive effect of bodily fluids, including wound exudate, urine, liquid faeces, stoma output and sweat. There are many products to choose from, which can be broadly categorised by ingredients. This article describes the differences in mechanisms of action between barrier products comprising petrolatum and/or zinc oxide, silicone film-forming polymers and cyanoacrylates, and compares the evidence on them. The literature indicates that all types of barrier product are clinically effective, with little comparative evidence indicating that any one ingredient is more efficacious than another, although film-forming polymers and cyanoacrylates have been found to be easier to apply and more cost-effective. However, laboratory evidence, albeit limited, indicates that a concentrated cyanoacrylate produced a more substantial and adherent layer on a porcine explant when compared with a diluted cyanoacrylate and was more effective at protecting skin from abrasion and repeated exposure to moisture than a film-forming polymer. Finally, a silicone-based cream containing micronutrients was found to significantly reduce the incidence of pressure ulceration when used as part of a comprehensive prevention strategy.

Effect of a surfactant-based gel on patient quality of life.

The characteristic clinical signs of chronic wounds, which remain in a state of prolonged inflammation, include increased production of devitalised tissue and exudate, pain and malodour. The presence of necrotic tissue, slough and copious exudate encourages microbial proliferation, potentially resulting in planktonic and/or biofilm infection. For patients, the consequences can include leakage of exudate, pain and reduced mobility, which can impair their ability to socialise and perform activities of daily living. This can severely reduce their quality of life and wellbeing. Concentrated surfactant-based gels (Plurogel and Plurogel SSD) are used in wound cleansing to help manage devitalised tissue. In vitro studies indicate they can sequester planktonic microbes and biofilm from the wound bed, although there is, limited clinical evidence to support this. A group of health professionals who have used this concentrated surfactant gel, in combination with standard care, in their clinical practice for several years recently met at a closed panel session. Here, they present case studies where topical application of these gels resulted in positive clinical outcomes in previously long-standing recalcitrant wounds. In all cases, the reduction in inflammation and bioburden alleviated symptoms that previously severely impaired health-related quality of life and wellbeing.