Cost-effective wound management: a survey of 1717 nurses

Abstract

Delivering high-quality wound care requires a mix of knowledge and skills, which nurses aim to update by attending educational events such as conferences and study days. This article describes the data obtained from 30 educational study days, which took place across England, Scotland and Wales. It will explore nurses' knowledge in relation to the cost-effectiveness and clinical efficacy of current wound care practices, based on the answers of 1717 delegates that attended the events. It will also outline the results in relation to reducing expenditure on wound dressings and the importance of performing an accurate wound assessment.

Dressing change frequency following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a pilot study

“…They conclude that most of the human resource in the health system is used in wound management and recommend that reducing the dressing change frequency in conjunction with a reduction in the number of dressings could lead to a reduction in dressing expenditure 12 . The same opinion has been also expressed by other authors, as they support the view that less frequent changes can have benefits for the patients, as the wound bed is not exposed, the wound healing outcomes are optimized and there is a reduction on dressing expenditure 4,13 .…”

“…Moreover, the economic burden that arises from frequent dressing changes is not to be overlooked. Costeffective care practices and reduced expenditure on wound dressings are mandatory 4 .…”

How generalist nurses inform their clinical decision-making in wound management: a scoping review

“…No relevant studies were identified in the grey literature. After excluding duplicates and irrelevant articles, 14 eligible articles remained (Figure 1) 6,[18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] . Following screening, secondary sources identified a relevant article which was not identified in the original search as the MESH term "ulcer" was not used in the strategy.…”

“…Of the 14 articles relevant for this scoping review, the majority were quantitative designs (n=11) and the remaining used qualitative designs (n=3), with studies undertaken Of the quantitative studies, nine studies used a cross-sectional descriptive design and two used a quasi-experimental design. The smallest sample was 31 participants 18 and the largest 1,717 participants 19 . Most of these studies had either small samples between 26-50 participants (four studies), or moderate samples between 101-150 participants (five studies).…”

“…Assessment of pain levels was included in three studies as a decision-making factor, either to guide the aim to reduce pain during dressing changes or as an indicator of the significance of wound deterioration or infection presence. In two studies, 79-96% of participants considered pain reduction during dressing changes 19,24 . However, in a medium-grade crosssectional study, only 8% of nurses thought preventing pain was an important consideration in wound management 27 .…”