| Literature DB >> 35270587 |
Dariusz Bazaliński1,2, Joanna Przybek Mita2,3, Lucyna Ścisło4, Paweł Więch2,5.
Abstract
The sight and smell of larvae in the wound may cause negative visual and olfactory impressions in sensitive individuals because of decaying body parts, carrion, and suffering. However, Maggot Debridement Therapy (MDT) is highly effective, safe, and cheap in wound healing and tissue revitalization for both the patient and health systems. The aim of the study was to assess the readiness to undertake MDT in a group of qualified nurses who perform therapeutic procedures in patients treated for chronic wounds. A diagnostic survey was used. The research tool was a scientific research protocol consisting of three questionnaires (sociodemographics, MDT perception questionnaire, pictures of wounds for visual assessment). The study included 290 nurses; the mean age was over 42.6 ± 9.9 years, and the median was 44 years. The perception and readiness to implement the method in the tested sample is at the average (standard) level. The image of maggots in the wound causes negative emotions among medical personnel. The higher the knowledge of the MDT method, the greater the motivation to implement it in practice.Entities:
Keywords: Maggot Debridement Therapy; nurse; perception; wound
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35270587 PMCID: PMC8910558 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19052895
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Reliability analysis of the MDT readiness scale (primary version).
| Items of the Scale | Mean of the Scale after Removing an Item | Scale Variance after Removing an Item | Total Item Correlation | The Sq of Mult. Correl. | Cronbach’s Alpha after Removing an Item 1 | Cronbach’s Alpha after Removing an Item 2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | The use of Lucilia sericata larvae accelerates the debridement of necrotic tissue in the treatment of chronic wounds compared with autolytic and mechanical methods | 51.66 | 45.12 | 0.45 | 0.41 | 0.774 | 0.863 |
| 2 | The most common side effect of MDT is damage to the epidermis around the wound | 52.79 | 45.90 | 0.26 | 0.25 | 0.788 | |
| 3 | A single maggot can remove 25 mg of necrotic material from a wound in 24 h | 52.53 | 42.62 | 0.51 | 0.45 | 0.767 | 0.867 |
| 4 | A wound with “black” non-demarcated necrosis is not eligible for MDT | 52.67 | 46.42 | 0.18 | 0.23 | 0.799 | |
| 5 | A wound with “yellow” tissue accompanied by profuse exudate is not eligible for MDT | 53.37 | 48.82 | 0.02 | 0.26 | 0.813 | |
| 6 | I can independently apply the larvae to the wound and conduct the therapy within 3–4 days | 53.13 | 44.35 | 0.26 | 0.22 | 0.794 | |
| 7 | Brown exudate with a specific smell during MDT therapy is a positive symptom suggesting liquefaction of necrotic tissue by the larvae | 52.50 | 43.91 | 0.47 | 0.42 | 0.771 | 0.870 |
| 8 | 5–10 larvae are usually used per 1 cm2 for wound debridement | 52.51 | 43.36 | 0.48 | 0.45 | 0.770 | 0.867 |
| 9 | I try to reduce the discharge before application of the larvae in a wound with profuse exudate | 52.63 | 45.89 | 0.31 | 0.28 | 0.783 | |
| 10 | Wound edge protection is essential to protect the skin from migration and irritation by larvae defensins (secretions) | 51.87 | 44.29 | 0.55 | 0.50 | 0.767 | 0.864 |
| 11 | I am committed to improving the patient’s quality of life and healing the wound that I am dealing with | 51.46 | 44.63 | 0.56 | 0.61 | 0.768 | 0.858 |
| 12 | I am motivated to conduct educational activities so that the patient tolerates MDT as good as possible | 51.60 | 44.20 | 0.61 | 0.63 | 0.764 | 0.856 |
| 13 | I change the top dressings and control the wound in such a way to minimize patient’s visual contact with the larvae in the wound | 51.70 | 44.54 | 0.55 | 0.54 | 0.768 | 0.863 |
| 14 | I point out the benefits of topical wound therapy with MDT to the patient | 51.55 | 44.16 | 0.63 | 0.69 | 0.764 | 0.856 |
| 15 | I implement MDT in case patient accepts it and clinical indications | 51.90 | 42.11 | 0.62 | 0.59 | 0.758 | 0.854 |
1 With all potential items analyzed. This is coefficient for the whole scale if the particular item was removed, i.e., Cronbach’s alpha for the whole scale consisted of the remaining items. It helps to determine which items decrease the overall reliability of the scale and potentially can be removed. 2 After reducing the number of items and eliminating items that reduced the reliability of the scale. The background color is necessary because we marked with it the items that were excluded from the main scale
Summary of the understanding/knowledge of MDT use after the analysis (MDT10).
| MDT10 | |
|---|---|
| Number of items | 10 |
| Scale range | 10–50 |
| Low value | 10–37 |
| Medium value | 38–43 |
| High value | 44–50 |
Figure 1Wounds presented for evaluation by the subjects.
Demographic characteristics of the respondents.
| N | % | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | Total | 290 | 100.0% |
| Female | 255 | 87.9% | |
| Male | 35 | 12.1% | |
| Age | 24–34 | 77 | 26.6% |
| 35–44 | 74 | 25.5% | |
| 45–54 | 105 | 36.2% | |
| Education * | 55–64 | 34 | 11.7% |
| Registered nurse | 61 | 21.0% | |
| Bachelor of nursing | 71 | 24.5% | |
| Work experience in the profession of a nurse | 1–5 years | 52 | 17.9% |
| 11–15 years | 33 | 11.4% | |
| 16–20 years | 59 | 20.3% | |
| 21–30 years | 61 | 21.0% | |
| More than 30 years | 54 | 18.6% | |
* Nursing education in Poland is diversified since the European Union accession in 2004. Education is provided at the level of first and second degree studies; previously, it was provided in post-secondary schools and vocational high schools.
Tests for the normality of the distribution of self-assessment of knowledge about wound treatment and readiness for MDT.
| Tests of Normality | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Self-Assessment Questions | Kolmogorov–Smirnov a | Shapiro–Wilk | ||||
| Statistic | df | Sig. | Statistic | df | Sig. | |
| How do you assess the level of your current knowledge of wound treatment? | 0.122 | 290 | <0.001 | 0.968 | 290 | <0.001 |
| How do you assess the level of your current knowledge of wound treatment with MDT? | 0.157 | 290 | <0.001 | 0.937 | 290 | <0.001 |
| Assess your readiness for treating wounds with the use of MDT? | 0.154 | 290 | <0.001 | 0.933 | 290 | <0.001 |
a. Lilliefors Significance Correction.
Descriptive statistics of variables of self-assessment of knowledge about wound treatment and readiness to use MDT (variables ranged from 0 to 10).
| Parametrics | How Do You Assess the Level of Your Current Knowledge of Wound Treatment? | How Do You Assess the Level of Your Current Knowledge of Wound Treatment with MDT? | Assess Your Readiness for Treating Wounds with the Use of MDT? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 5.92 | 4.23 | 4.87 |
| Standard deviation | 2.01 | 2.51 | 3.11 |
| Minimum | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Maximum | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Median | 6 | 4 | 4 |
| Percentile 25 | 5 | 2 | 3 |
| Percentile 75 | 7 | 6 | 7 |
| Valid N | 290 | 290 | 290 |
Correlation coefficients of variables of self-evaluation of knowledge about wound treatment, MDT readiness and understanding/knowledge MDT use.
| Correlation Coefficients of Variables of Self-Evaluation | Self-Assessment of Knowledge on Wound Healing with the Use of MDT | Self-Assessment of Readiness for Wound Healing with the Use of MDT | Shortened MDT 10 Questionnaire | Motivation Subscale to MDT 10 (5 Items) | Knowledge Subscale MDT 10 (5 Items) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Self-assessment of knowledge on wound healing | 0.600 | 0.620 | 0.095 | 0.082 | 0.061 |
| <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.105 | 0.165 | 0.303 | |
| Self-assessment of knowledge on wound healing with the use of MDT | 0.734 | 0.376 | 0.312 | 0.347 | |
| <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | ||
| Self-assessment of readiness for wound healing with the use of MDT | 0.303 | 0.287 | 0.218 | ||
| <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | |||
| Shortened MDT 10 questionnaire | 0.889 | 0.892 | |||
| <0.001 | <0.001 | ||||
| MOTIVATION subscale to MDT 10 (5 items) | 0.616 | ||||
| <0.001 |
Figure 2Selection of the photo (1–6) of the most repulsive wound. Distribution of choices among all participants in sex categories.
Selection of the most repulsive photo and seniority as a nurse.
| Work Experience in the Profession of a Nurse | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | 1–9 Years | 10–19 Years | 20–29 Years | 30+ Years | |
| Photo 1 | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Photo 2 | 37.6% | 25.7% | 41.7% | 27.4% | 57.1% |
| Photo 3 | 0.7% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.4% | 1.6% |
| Photo 4 | 11.4% | 8.6% | 17.9% | 13.7% | 3.2% |
| Photo 5 | 42.4% | 62.9% | 34.5% | 4.9% | 23.8% |
| Photo 6 | 7.9% | 2.9% | 6.0% | 9.6% | 14.3% |
| Total | 290 | 70 | 84 | 73 | 63 |