Chronic wounds: Treatment consensus

  • Elof Eriksson
    Harvard Medical School Boston MA USA
  • Paul Y. Liu
    Department of Plastic Surgery, Rhode Island Hospital Alpert Medical School of Brown University Providence RI USA
  • Gregory S. Schultz
    Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Institute for Wound Research University of Florida Gainesville FA USA
  • Manuela M. Martins‐Green
    Department of Molecular, Cell and Systems Biology Laboratory of Wound Healing Biology, University of California Riverside CA USA
  • Rica Tanaka
    Juntendo University School of Medicine Tokyo Japan
  • Dot Weir
    Saratoga Hospital Center for Wound Healing and Hyperbaric Medicine Saratoga Springs New York USA
  • Lisa J. Gould
    Department of Surgery South Shore Hospital South Weymouth Massachusetts USA
  • David G. Armstrong
    Keck School of Medicine of University of Southern California Los Angeles CA USA
  • Gary W. Gibbons
    Boston University School of Medicine, Center for Wound Healing South Shore Health Weymouth MA USA
  • Randy Wolcott
    Southwest Regional WCC Lubbock Texas USA
  • Oluyinka O. Olutoye
    Center for Regenerative Medicine Abigail Wexner Research Institute, Nationwide Children's Hospital Columbus OH USA
  • Robert S. Kirsner
    Dr Philip Frost Department of Dermatology and Cutaneous Surgery University of Miami Miller School of Medicine Miami FA USA
  • Geoffrey C. Gurtner
    Stanford University School of Medicine Palo Alto CA USA

抄録

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>The Wound Healing Foundation (WHF) recognised a need for an unbiased consensus on the best treatment of chronic wounds. A panel of 13 experts were invited to a virtual meeting which took place on 27 March 2021. The proceedings were organised in the sub‐sections diagnosis, debridement, infection control, dressings, grafting, pain management, oxygen treatment, outcomes and future needs. Eighty percent or better concurrence among the panellists was considered a consensus. A large number of critical questions were discussed and agreed upon. Important takeaways included that wound care needs to be simplified to a point that it can be delivered by the patient or the patient's family. Another one was that telemonitoring, which has proved very useful during the COVID‐19 pandemic, can help reduce the frequency of interventions by a visiting nurse or a wound care center. Defining patient expectations is critical to designing a successful treatment. Patient outcomes might include wound specific outcomes such as time to heal, wound size reduction, as well as improvement in quality of life. For those patients with expectations of healing, an aggressive approach to achieve that goal is recommended. When healing is not an expectation, such as in patients receiving palliative wound care, outcomes might include pain reduction, exudate management, odour management and/or other quality of life benefits to wound care.</jats:p>

収録刊行物

被引用文献 (1)*注記

もっと見る

参考文献 (117)*注記

もっと見る

関連プロジェクト

もっと見る

詳細情報 詳細情報について

問題の指摘

ページトップへ