Cargando…
A multicentre cross-sectional survey study on acute wound classification in the emergency department and its interobserver variability
Annually, a vast number of patients visits the emergency department for acute wounds. Many wound classification systems exist, but often these were not originally designed for acute wounds. This study aimed to assess the most frequently used classifications for acute wounds in the Netherlands and th...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9196857/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35701441 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-13221-1 |
_version_ | 1784727274000482304 |
---|---|
author | van Gennip, Lisanne Haverkamp, Frederike J. C. Sir, Özcan Tan, Edward C. T. H. |
author_facet | van Gennip, Lisanne Haverkamp, Frederike J. C. Sir, Özcan Tan, Edward C. T. H. |
author_sort | van Gennip, Lisanne |
collection | PubMed |
description | Annually, a vast number of patients visits the emergency department for acute wounds. Many wound classification systems exist, but often these were not originally designed for acute wounds. This study aimed to assess the most frequently used classifications for acute wounds in the Netherlands and the interobserver variability of the Gustilo Anderson wound classification (GAWC) and Red Cross wound classification (RCWC) in acute wounds. This multicentre cross-sectional survey study employed an online oral questionnaire. We contacted emergency physicians from eleven hospitals in the south-eastern part of the Netherlands and identified the currently applied classifications. Participants classified ten fictitious wounds by applying the GAWC and RCWC. Afterwards, they rated the user-friendliness of these classifications. We examined the interobserver variability of both classifications using a Fleiss’ kappa analysis, with a subdivision in RCWC grades and types representing wound severity and injured tissue structures. The study included twenty emergency physicians from eight hospitals. Fifty percent of the participants reported using a classification for acute wounds, mostly the GAWC. The interobserver variability of the GAWC (κ = 0.46; 95% CI 0.44–0.49) and RCWC grades (κ = 0.56; 95% CI 0.53–0.59) was moderate, and it was good for the RCWC types (κ = 0.69; 95% CI 0.66–0.73). Participants considered both classifications helpful for acute wound assessment when the emergency physician was less experienced, despite a moderate user-friendliness. The GAWC was only of additional value in wounds with fractures, whereas the RCWC’s additional value in acute wound assessment was independent of the presence of a fracture. Emergency physicians are reserved to use a classification for acute wound assessment. The interobserver variability of the GAWC and RCWC in acute wounds is promising, and both classifications are easy to apply. However, their user-friendliness is moderate. It is recommended to apply the GAWC to acute wounds with underlying fractures and the RCWC to major traumatic injuries. Awareness should be raised of existing wound classifications, specifically among less experienced healthcare professionals. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9196857 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-91968572022-06-16 A multicentre cross-sectional survey study on acute wound classification in the emergency department and its interobserver variability van Gennip, Lisanne Haverkamp, Frederike J. C. Sir, Özcan Tan, Edward C. T. H. Sci Rep Article Annually, a vast number of patients visits the emergency department for acute wounds. Many wound classification systems exist, but often these were not originally designed for acute wounds. This study aimed to assess the most frequently used classifications for acute wounds in the Netherlands and the interobserver variability of the Gustilo Anderson wound classification (GAWC) and Red Cross wound classification (RCWC) in acute wounds. This multicentre cross-sectional survey study employed an online oral questionnaire. We contacted emergency physicians from eleven hospitals in the south-eastern part of the Netherlands and identified the currently applied classifications. Participants classified ten fictitious wounds by applying the GAWC and RCWC. Afterwards, they rated the user-friendliness of these classifications. We examined the interobserver variability of both classifications using a Fleiss’ kappa analysis, with a subdivision in RCWC grades and types representing wound severity and injured tissue structures. The study included twenty emergency physicians from eight hospitals. Fifty percent of the participants reported using a classification for acute wounds, mostly the GAWC. The interobserver variability of the GAWC (κ = 0.46; 95% CI 0.44–0.49) and RCWC grades (κ = 0.56; 95% CI 0.53–0.59) was moderate, and it was good for the RCWC types (κ = 0.69; 95% CI 0.66–0.73). Participants considered both classifications helpful for acute wound assessment when the emergency physician was less experienced, despite a moderate user-friendliness. The GAWC was only of additional value in wounds with fractures, whereas the RCWC’s additional value in acute wound assessment was independent of the presence of a fracture. Emergency physicians are reserved to use a classification for acute wound assessment. The interobserver variability of the GAWC and RCWC in acute wounds is promising, and both classifications are easy to apply. However, their user-friendliness is moderate. It is recommended to apply the GAWC to acute wounds with underlying fractures and the RCWC to major traumatic injuries. Awareness should be raised of existing wound classifications, specifically among less experienced healthcare professionals. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-06-14 /pmc/articles/PMC9196857/ /pubmed/35701441 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-13221-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article van Gennip, Lisanne Haverkamp, Frederike J. C. Sir, Özcan Tan, Edward C. T. H. A multicentre cross-sectional survey study on acute wound classification in the emergency department and its interobserver variability |
title | A multicentre cross-sectional survey study on acute wound classification in the emergency department and its interobserver variability |
title_full | A multicentre cross-sectional survey study on acute wound classification in the emergency department and its interobserver variability |
title_fullStr | A multicentre cross-sectional survey study on acute wound classification in the emergency department and its interobserver variability |
title_full_unstemmed | A multicentre cross-sectional survey study on acute wound classification in the emergency department and its interobserver variability |
title_short | A multicentre cross-sectional survey study on acute wound classification in the emergency department and its interobserver variability |
title_sort | multicentre cross-sectional survey study on acute wound classification in the emergency department and its interobserver variability |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9196857/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35701441 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-13221-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vangenniplisanne amulticentrecrosssectionalsurveystudyonacutewoundclassificationintheemergencydepartmentanditsinterobservervariability AT haverkampfrederikejc amulticentrecrosssectionalsurveystudyonacutewoundclassificationintheemergencydepartmentanditsinterobservervariability AT sirozcan amulticentrecrosssectionalsurveystudyonacutewoundclassificationintheemergencydepartmentanditsinterobservervariability AT tanedwardcth amulticentrecrosssectionalsurveystudyonacutewoundclassificationintheemergencydepartmentanditsinterobservervariability AT vangenniplisanne multicentrecrosssectionalsurveystudyonacutewoundclassificationintheemergencydepartmentanditsinterobservervariability AT haverkampfrederikejc multicentrecrosssectionalsurveystudyonacutewoundclassificationintheemergencydepartmentanditsinterobservervariability AT sirozcan multicentrecrosssectionalsurveystudyonacutewoundclassificationintheemergencydepartmentanditsinterobservervariability AT tanedwardcth multicentrecrosssectionalsurveystudyonacutewoundclassificationintheemergencydepartmentanditsinterobservervariability |