Laura Martinengo1, Maja Olsson1, Ram Bajpai1, Michael Soljak1, Zee Upton2, Artur Schmidtchen3, Josip Car4, Krister Järbrink1. 1. Centre for Population Health Sciences (CePHaS), Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore. 2. Institute of Medical Biology, Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore, Singapore; Dermatology, Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore. 3. Dermatology, Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore; Division of Dermatology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Biomedical Center B14, Lund University, Lund, Sweden; Copenhagen Wound Healing Center, Bispebjerg Hospital, Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 4. Centre for Population Health Sciences (CePHaS), Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore; Global eHealth Unit, Department of Primary Care and Public Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK. Electronic address: josip.car@ntu.edu.sg.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Chronic wounds are a major public health challenge, but little is known about the true burden with studies reporting different estimates because of disparities in study designs and measurement methods. This hampers efficient resource allocation, planning, and improvement of wound care. METHODS: Our study aimed to pool prevalence estimates from a global perspective by systematically carrying out searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL, Global Health, and PsycINFO databases for articles reporting the prevalence of chronic wounds in adults, from January 2000 to June 2018. The included publications had to define wound chronicity by duration (≥3 weeks), and/or labeling the wounds as chronic, complex, or hard-to-heal. RESULTS: Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria, and 11 studies analyzing chronic wounds in the general population were included in random effects meta-analyses to calculate pooled prevalence. Chronic wounds of mixed etiologies (n = 3) showed a pooled prevalence of 2.21 per 1000 population, and for chronic leg ulcers (n = 9), the prevalence was estimated at 1.51 per 1000 population. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings, aligned to previous studies reporting point prevalence of chronic wounds identified within the healthcare system, showed that the vast majority of chronic wounds in epidemiological studies are made up by chronic leg ulcers.
PURPOSE: Chronic wounds are a major public health challenge, but little is known about the true burden with studies reporting different estimates because of disparities in study designs and measurement methods. This hampers efficient resource allocation, planning, and improvement of wound care. METHODS: Our study aimed to pool prevalence estimates from a global perspective by systematically carrying out searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL, Global Health, and PsycINFO databases for articles reporting the prevalence of chronic wounds in adults, from January 2000 to June 2018. The included publications had to define wound chronicity by duration (≥3 weeks), and/or labeling the wounds as chronic, complex, or hard-to-heal. RESULTS: Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria, and 11 studies analyzing chronic wounds in the general population were included in random effects meta-analyses to calculate pooled prevalence. Chronic wounds of mixed etiologies (n = 3) showed a pooled prevalence of 2.21 per 1000 population, and for chronic leg ulcers (n = 9), the prevalence was estimated at 1.51 per 1000 population. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings, aligned to previous studies reporting point prevalence of chronic wounds identified within the healthcare system, showed that the vast majority of chronic wounds in epidemiological studies are made up by chronic leg ulcers.
Authors: Vincent Falanga; Roslyn Rivkah Isseroff; Athena M Soulika; Marco Romanelli; David Margolis; Suzanne Kapp; Mark Granick; Keith Harding Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2022-07-21 Impact factor: 65.038
Authors: Mari van de Vyver; Kiara Boodhoo; Trivia Frazier; Katie Hamel; Marta Kopcewicz; Benjamin Levi; Michelle Maartens; Sylwia Machcinska; Johanna Nunez; Chase Pagani; Emma Rogers; Katarzyna Walendzik; Joanna Wisniewska; Barbara Gawronska-Kozak; Jeffrey M Gimble Journal: Stem Cells Dev Date: 2021-07-14 Impact factor: 4.390
Authors: Julia Deinsberger; Jonas Brugger; Philipp Tschandl; Barbara Meier-Schiesser; Florian Anzengruber; Simon Bossart; Stanislava Tzaneva; Peter Petzelbauer; Kornelia Böhler; Helmut Beltraminelli; Jürg Hafner; Benedikt Weber Journal: Acta Derm Venereol Date: 2021-05-04 Impact factor: 3.875
Authors: Abdulrahman E Koshak; Mardi M Algandaby; Mohammad I Mujallid; Ashraf B Abdel-Naim; Nabil A Alhakamy; Usama A Fahmy; Anas Alfarsi; Shaimaa M Badr-Eldin; Thikryat Neamatallah; Mohammed Z Nasrullah; Hossam M Abdallah; Ahmed Esmat Journal: Int J Nanomedicine Date: 2021-06-09