T Swanson1, R D Wolcott2, H Wallis3, E J Woodmansey4. 1. Nurse Practitioner Wound Management, South West Healthcare, Ryot St. Warrnambool. Victoria 3280, Australia. 2. Medical Director, Southwest Regional Wound Care Center, Lubbock, Texas, US. 3. Senior Global Brand Development Manager, Smith & Nephew Ltd, Hull, UK. 4. Scientific Communications Manager, Smith & Nephew Ltd, Hull, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this survey was to examine health professionals' views and practices relating to biofilm in chronic wounds. METHOD: A global online survey was conducted to assess the current understanding of biofilm and wound management practices. The survey consisted of 20 questions designed to evaluate health professional knowledge of biofilm, perception and understanding of biofilm behaviour, detection and diagnosis, and treatment. Respondents were classified as 'specialists' if wounds were their primary focus and they developed protocols and determined formularies. Respondents were classified as 'generalists' if wounds were part of multiple indications they treat and they were able to choose wound care products from a restricted list of products. The Pearson's chi-square or Fisher's exact test was used to assess whether the responses were independent of the clinician role, health-care setting and country. RESULTS: Overall, 3011 health professionals took part in the survey, of which 397 were excluded or disqualified. Of the remaining 2614 respondents, 1223 (46.8%) completed the entire survey. Although the majority of health professionals were aware of biofilm, knowledge gaps regarding its prevalence in chronic wounds were evident. In general, the majority indicated that they understood that biofilm is detrimental to wound healing. With the exception of wound stalling, there was a lack of consensus on other clinical signs in the detection and diagnosis of biofilm. Knowledge gaps were also evident over the treatment of biofilm and the efficacy of antimicrobial treatments, debridement and wound dressing. CONCLUSION: Our results show that though there is a broad recognition of biofilm and its possible role in chronic wounds, there is still a need to educate and increase knowledge on recognition and treatment of biofilm.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this survey was to examine health professionals' views and practices relating to biofilm in chronic wounds. METHOD: A global online survey was conducted to assess the current understanding of biofilm and wound management practices. The survey consisted of 20 questions designed to evaluate health professional knowledge of biofilm, perception and understanding of biofilm behaviour, detection and diagnosis, and treatment. Respondents were classified as 'specialists' if wounds were their primary focus and they developed protocols and determined formularies. Respondents were classified as 'generalists' if wounds were part of multiple indications they treat and they were able to choose wound care products from a restricted list of products. The Pearson's chi-square or Fisher's exact test was used to assess whether the responses were independent of the clinician role, health-care setting and country. RESULTS: Overall, 3011 health professionals took part in the survey, of which 397 were excluded or disqualified. Of the remaining 2614 respondents, 1223 (46.8%) completed the entire survey. Although the majority of health professionals were aware of biofilm, knowledge gaps regarding its prevalence in chronic wounds were evident. In general, the majority indicated that they understood that biofilm is detrimental to wound healing. With the exception of wound stalling, there was a lack of consensus on other clinical signs in the detection and diagnosis of biofilm. Knowledge gaps were also evident over the treatment of biofilm and the efficacy of antimicrobial treatments, debridement and wound dressing. CONCLUSION: Our results show that though there is a broad recognition of biofilm and its possible role in chronic wounds, there is still a need to educate and increase knowledge on recognition and treatment of biofilm.
Keywords:
biofilm; health professional knowledge; survey; wound infection; wound management
Authors: Anh K Lam; Hannah Panlilio; Jennifer Pusavat; Cassandra L Wouters; Erika L Moen; Charles V Rice Journal: ACS Infect Dis Date: 2020-04-06 Impact factor: 5.084
Authors: Anh K Lam; Erika L Moen; Jennifer Pusavat; Cassandra L Wouters; Hannah Panlilio; Maya J Ferrell; Matthew B Houck; Daniel T Glatzhofer; Charles V Rice Journal: ACS Omega Date: 2020-09-29