What caused Mr. M’s pressure ulcer?

A court case answers the question as to whether a pressure ulcer was preventable

By Nancy J. Brent, MS, RN, JD

Pressure ulcers are a major health risk for every adult patient. Risk factors include sepsis, hypotension, and age 70 or older. These risk factors became all too real when Mr. M developed pressure ulcers after being admitted to a Texas hospital.

Background

Mr. M, age 81, presented at a medical center’s emergency department on January 2 complaining of abdominal pain. After undergoing an assessment, he was diagnosed with gallstones and admitted to the hospital. The next day, he had gallbladder surgery. He subsequently developed a bowel obstruction and had to undergo two more surgeries for this condition over the next 10 days.
On January 13, he was transferred to the intensive care unit (ICU) because of multiple serious medical conditions, including respiratory distress syndrome (necessitating ventilatory support), septic shock, a “blood infection” that caused his blood pressure to drop, and multiorgan failure. His primary physician discontinued tube feedings out of concern they might exacerbate his renal failure; he wrote a do-not-resuscitate order and ordered sedation.
Mr. M was unable to turn or position himself in any way. While in the ICU, he developed a “skin tear” on the tailbone (coccyx) that progressed to a serious pressure ulcer. On February 6, his condition improved enough to allow his transfer to a rehabilitation hospital, where he developed pressure ulcers on his heels. He was transferred to another hospital; the ulcer on his coccyx healed by August. He remained in that hospital for 1 year before being discharged home.
Despite healing of the pressure ulcer on his coccyx, the wound area remained hard and painful, and Mr. M experienced “daily discomfort” there. Also, he was unable to do many of the things he’d been able to do before his hospitalization.

Mr. M files a medical malpractice suit

Mr. M sued the medical center, alleging the hospital was negligent by failing to prevent the pressure ulcer from forming through the use of known “pressure relief” methods, and that the hospital failed to provide proper care and treatment of the wound once it was discovered.
At trial, the medical center lawyers argued that Mr. M’s grave condition caused the pressure ulcer to develop. The jury returned a verdict for Mr. M, finding that the medical center’s negligence proximately caused the injuries he sustained. It awarded him $35,000 for medical expenses; $135,000 for past physical pain and mental anguish; $25,000 for future physical pain and mental anguish; $25,000 for past physical impairment; and $25,000 for future physical impairment. The medical center appealed the decision.

Medical center appeals the verdict

Several issues were raised by the medical center on appeal. Of particular interest to nurses and wound care practitioners was the “cause in fact” or the “proximate cause” of Mr. M’s pressure ulcer on the coccyx. Because an expert witness must establish proximate cause based on a reasonable degree of medical certainty, Mr. M’s case became a battle of the experts regarding the care he received, or lack of care, relative to development of the pressure ulcer.

Expert witness testimony for Mr. M

The first nurse expert to testify was Mr. M’s highly qualified expert. She testified about the various acceptable ways to provide pressure relief, including turning the patient or, if the patient can’t be turned, repositioning. The latter requires use of foam wedges or pillows to elevate a particular body part. The nurse expert testified that if a patient can’t be turned or repositioned, that fact must be documented along with the reason for inability to carry out this nursing care.
Proper assessment of the pressure ulcer is required so that other team members can “see” the wound; the clinician who assesses the wound should draw a picture of exactly what he or she saw when documenting the note in the patient’s chart. The nurse expert testified that the assessment should include the color, duration, and depth of the pressure ulcer; presence or absence of infection; and whether the tissue was dead or perfused.
After reviewing the medical center’s policies and protocols on pressure relief, which required nurses to provide pressure relief every 2 hours, and the depositions of the nurses who’d cared for Mr. M, the nurse expert testified there was no documentation showing Mr. M received any pressure relief from January 13 to January 16. She said she could only conclude that the nurses failed to turn or reposition him during those days. The only notation made about his skin condition was when nurses discovered the “skin tear” on January 14. After this discovery, the physician wasn’t notified of it until January 19. On that date, the physician ordered a wound care consult, but the actual consultation didn’t occur until 3 days later. Even with the wound consultant’s specific, written orders to care for the wound, only one notation existed showing that the orders were followed. Also, the wound care orders weren’t entered into Mr. M’s care plan until January 28. Additionally, in their depositions, the nurses caring for Mr. M couldn’t recall changing the dressing as ordered.
Therefore, in the nurse expert’s opinion, the pressure ulcer on Mr. M’s coccyx was caused directly by failure of the ICU nurses to provide pressure relief from January 14 to January 16 and that providing the wound care that was ordered would have prevented the ulcer from getting worse and would have healed the ulcer.
Although a physician serving as a second expert for Mr. M also testified that pressure relief should have been provided, he couldn’t say that development of the pressure ulcer was unpreventable.

Expert witness testimony for the medical center

Not surprisingly, the medical center’s expert witnesses, two of whom were physicians, testified that because of Mr. M’s general medical condition, he would have developed the pressure ulcer even if hospital policies and protocols had been followed. The hospital’s nurse expert witness stated that Mr. M’s pressure ulcer was not preventable because of his medical condition, regardless of whether or not he was turned. In her opinion, the active range of motion his nurses put him through was enough to reperfuse the area.

Appellate court’s decision

The appellate court upheld the trial court jury’s verdict, stating that evidence presented at the trial was legally and factually sufficient to support that verdict.

Take-away points

Mr. M’s case undoubtedly was complicated by his age and general medical condition, as well as disagreement among expert witnesses as to the cause of the pressure ulcer on his coccyx. Even so, the appellate court held that the evidence at trial (specifically that presented by Mr. M’s nurse expert witness) was sufficient legally and factually to support the verdict in favor of Mr. M.
This case illustrates many areas of importance for nurses in terms of formation and care of pressure ulcers. They include the following:
• Risk factors supporting potential formation of pressure ulcers can’t be overlooked or underestimated by nursing staff.
• A plan to prevent pressure ulcers should be initiated on admission for every patient who is immobile or has other risk factors for pressure ulcers.
• Documentation of every aspect of nursing care that’s initiated and continued to prevent pressure ulcers from forming must be carried out as ordered and pursuant to hospital policy and protocol.
• Care plans, communications with other health team members, and carrying out of orders must be done as soon as possible.
• Assessment and documentation of pressure ulcers should include enough detail so other health team members can visualize what the nurse entering the documentation has seen.
• The nurse should assess and stage the pressure ulcer at each dressing change.
• One’s expert witness must be credentialed, educated, and experienced in would care prevention and treatment, because his or her testimony can win or lose a case.

Nursing remains at the forefront of protecting and safeguarding patients from pressure ulcers. Although not every ulcer can be prevented, the goal is to prevent as many ulcers as possible. If a pressure ulcer does occur, caregivers’ essential focus must be on healing or preventing further deterioration and infection.

Selected references
Columbia Medical Center Subsidiary, L.P., d/b/a/
North Central Medical Center, Appellant, v. John Meier, Appellee. 198 S.W. 3d 408 (Ct. Appeals 2006).

Lyder CH, Ayello EA. Pressure ulcers: A Patient Safety Issue. In: Hughes RG, ed. Patient Safety and Quality: An Evidence-Based Handbook For Nurses. Rockville, MD: Agency For Healthcare Research and Quality. April 2008. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/
NBK2650/. Accessed November 1, 2012.

Nancy J. Brent is an attorney in Wilmette, Illinois. The information in this article is for educational purposes only and doesn’t constitute legal advice.

Read More

By Lydia Meyers, BSN, RN, CWCN

Necrotizing fasciitis (NF) results from an infection that attacks the fascia and subcutaneous tissues. The primary bacterial etiology is group A streptococcus, a facultative anaerobic bacterium. However, other bacteria may contribute. Sometimes called the “flesh-eating” disease because of the potentially devastating effect on the afflicted patient, NF can be monomicrobial or polymicrobial.

The four typical settings for NF are:

• surgical bowel or abdominal trauma surgery
• pressure ulcer and perianal abscess
• injection sites (especially in drug users)
• Bartholin abscess or minor vulvovaginal infection.

Because of the rapid course and ravaging nature of acute NF, clinicians must maintain a high index of suspicion if the patient has suggestive signs and symptoms. In 1990, puppeteer Jim Henson (best known for creating the Muppets) died from NF. At that time, little was known about the progression of group A streptococcal infection.
The disease can quickly cause death, so starting immediate treatment is even more crucial than confirming the diagnosis. Once the disease is suspected, antibiotics must be given immediately and the patient must be prepared for surgery at once. NF spreads rapidly, capable of progressing from a small lesion to death in days to weeks. Thus, delayed diagnosis increases the risk of death. Lack of knowledge about the disease and inability to recognize it promptly are the main reasons many victims die. This article can improve your knowledge base.

Overview

NF was discovered in 1871 by Joseph Jones, a Confederate Army surgeon. At that time, it was called hemolytic streptococcal gangrene, nonclostridial gas gangrene, nonclostridial crepitant cellulitis, necrotizing or gangrenous erysipelas, necrotizing cellulitis, bacterial synergistic gangrene, or synergistic necrotizing cellulitis.
NF involves the fascia, muscle compartments, or both. It can affect not only the muscle fascia but the superficial fascia. NF and cellulitis differ in the amount of tissue involved and extent of tissue involvement.
The most common areas of infection are the abdominal wall, perineum, and extremities. When NF affects the perineum and scrotum, it’s called Fournier gangrene, after the French dermatologist and virologist Alfred Jean Fournier.
The most common causes are trauma, surgery, and insect bites. The disease can affect persons of any age. Such comorbidities as diabetes, chronic renal failure, immunosuppressive therapy, hypertension, obesity, and malnutrition increase susceptibility.

Pathophysiology

NF falls into four classifications based on wound microbiology. Type 1, the most common, involves polymicrobial bacteria. Type 2 results from trauma and is associated with comorbidities. Type 3, rare in this country, stems from gram-negative marine bacteria. Type 4 is a fungal infection occurring mostly in immunocompromised persons. (See Comparing types of necrotizing fasciitis by clicking the PDF icon above.)

Disease progression

The four types of NF progress in a similar way. Bacteria secrete pyrogenic exotoxin A, which stimulates cytokines. These cyto­kines damage the endothelial lining; fluid then leaks into the extravascular space.
M proteins in streptococci and β-hemolytic streptococci exacerbate the immune reaction by inhibiting phagocytosis of polymorphonuclear leukocytes and normal neutrophil chemotaxis. As the immune reaction increases, blood vessels dilate, allowing toxins to leak through vessel walls, which in turn decreases blood flow. As the cascade continues, hypoxic conditions cause facultative aerobic organisms to grow and become anaerobic. These bacteria exacerbate destruction of surrounding cells and lead to release of carbon dioxide, water, hydrogen, nitrogen, hydrogen sulfide, and methane. As the infection continues to progress, toxins spread throughout the bloodstream and the patient becomes septic.

Assessment

Obtain the patient’s medical history and description of the wound. Determine when the changes first appeared and whether the affected area seemed to get worse recently.
In all NF types, patients commonly present with a small, painful area (possibly with entry marks) but no other signs or symptoms. The wound may appear as a bulla, cellulitis, or dermatitis, representing an infection developing in underlying tissues. The skin may have a wooden-hard feel as the infection progresses to the subcutaneous space and causes necrosis. The wound becomes discolored and necrotic; drainage is rare until surgical debridement begins. The patient quickly develops fever, chills, nausea, and vomiting. As NF progresses, bullae become dark purple with darkened edges; the patient grows disoriented and lethargic, and organ failure and respiratory failure
ensue. Without treatment, the patient dies.

Diagnosis

Diagnostic tests usually include magnetic resonance imaging, complete blood count with differential, comprehensive metabolic panel, and cultures. (See Diagnostic findings in necrotizing fasciitis by clicking the PDF icon above.)

Treatment

Immediate surgical debridement and broad-spectrum antibiotics are needed to stop the immune response to infection. Clindamycin, gentamicin, penicillin, or metronidazole may be given alone or in combination until culture results are available. Supportive care includes total parenteral nutrition for nutritional support, I.V. fluids, and oxygen. Limb amputation should be done only as a last resort.
Surgical debridement involves penetrating deep into the fascia and removing all necrotic tissue. After the first debridement, release of “dishwater fluid” may occur.
Administering hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) after the first debridement increases tissue oxygenation, thus reducing tissue destruction by anaerobic bacteria. During HBOT (usually given as a 90-minute treatment), the patient breathes 100% oxygen in an environment of increasing atmospheric pressure.
HBOT should be given in conjunction with surgical debridement (usually after each debridement) and should continue until necrotic tissue ceases and cell destruction stops. HBOT also promotes collagen synthesis and neoangiogenesis (new blood vessel growth), which boosts blood supply and oxygen to tissues.
Adverse effects of HBOT include ear pain, oxygen toxicity, and seizures. Ear pain can be minimized by swallowing or yawning. If the patient continues to have ear pain, ear tubes may be inserted by an otolaryngologist. During HBOT, air breaks (intervals of breathing room air) are important in controlling oxygen toxicity (the main cause of seizures).
Throughout the HBOT treatment period, wound dressings must be simple. Well-moistened gauze dressings and an abdominal pad provide good support. Once necrotic destruction occurs, dressings depend on wound size and the need to fill cavities. The patient may require a diverting colostomy, depending on wound
location and the amount of uncontrolled diarrhea. Blood glucose levels must be monitored before and after HBOT, as this treatment affects blood glucose.

Supportive care and follow-up treatment

During initial treatment, patients need supportive care and monitoring. Once they’re out of danger, begin teaching them how to prevent NF recurrences. Advise them to control blood glucose levels, keeping the glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level to 7% or less. Caution patients to keep needles capped until use and not to reuse needles. Instruct them to clean the skin thoroughly before blood glucose testing or insulin injection, and to use alcohol pads to clean the area afterward.
Before discharge, help arrange the patient’s aftercare, including home health care for wound management and teaching, social services to promote adjustment to lifestyle changes and financial concerns, and physical therapy to help rebuild strength and promote the return to optimal physical health. One helpful patient resource is the National Necrotizing Fasciitis Foundation. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention section on necrotizing fasciitis includes “Common sense and great wound care are the best ways to prevent a bacterial skin infection.”
The life-threatening nature of NF, scarring caused by the disease, and in some cases the need for limb amputation can alter the patient’s attitude and viewpoint, so be sure to take a holistic approach when dealing with the patient and family. Today, NF has a much better survival rate than 2 decades ago when Jim Henson died. In my practice, I’ve seen four NF cases. Thanks to early identification, good wound care, and HBOT, these patients suffered only minimal damage.

Selected references

Boyer A, Vargas F, Coste F, et al. Influence of surgical treatment timing on mortality from necrotizing soft tissue infections requiring intensive care management. Intensive Care Med. 2009;35(5):847-853. doi:10.1007/s00134-008-1373-4.

Cain S. Necrotizing fasciitis: recognition and care. Practice Nurs. 2010;21(6):297-302.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Notes from the field: fatal fungal soft-tissue infections after a tornado—Joplin, Missouri, 2011. MMWR. 2011;60(29):992.

Chamber AC, Leaper DJ. Role of oxygen in wound healing: a review of evidence. J Wound Care. 2011; 20(4):160-164.

Christophoros K, Achilleas K, Vasilia D, et al. Postraumatic zygomycotic necrotizing abdominal wall fasciitis with intraabdominal invasion in a non immunosuppressed patient. Internet J Surg. 2007;11(1). doi:10.5580/17a8.

Ecker K-W, Baars A, Topfer J, Frank J. Necrotizing fasciitis of the perineum and the abdominal wall-surgical approach. Europ J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2008;
34(3):219-228. doi:10.1007/s00068-008-8072-2.

Hunter J, Quarterman C, Waseem M, Wills A. Diagnosis and management of necrotizing fasciitis. Br J Hosp Med. 2011;72(7):391-395.

Magel DC. The nurse’s role in managing necrotizing fasciitis. AORN J. 2008;88(6):977-982.

Phanzu MD, Bafende AE, Imposo BB, Meyers WM, Portaels F. Under treated necrotizing fasciitis masquerading as ulcerated edematous Mycobacterium ulcerans infection (Buruli ulcer). Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2012;82(3):478-481.

Ruth-Sahd LA, Gonzales M. Multiple dimensions of caring for a patient with acute necrotizing fasciitis. Dimens Crit Care Nurs. 2006;25(1):15-21.

Stevens DL, Bisno AL, Chambers HF, et al; Infectious Diseases Society of America. Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of skin and soft-tissue infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2005;41(10):1373-1406.

Su YC, Chen HW, Hong YC, Chen CT, et al. Laboratory risk indicator for necrotizing fasciitis score and the outcomes. ANZ J Surg. 2008;78(11):968-972.

Taviloglu K, Yanar H. Necrotizing fasciitis: strategies for diagnosis and management. World J Emerg Surg. 2007;2:19.

Lydia Meyers is a medical reviewer for National Government Services in Castleton, Indiana, and a clinical liaison at CTI Nutrition in Indianapolis. She has 11 years of wound care experience in nursing homes, wound clinics, and home health.

Read More

By: Patricia A. Slachta, PhD, RN, ACNS-BC, CWOCN

Wound care has come a long way in just a few decades. With our expanded knowledge of wound healing and recent advances in treatment, we’re now able to assess wounds more accurately, recognize wound-related problems sooner, provide better interventions, and reduce morbidity.

To bring you up to date on current evidence-based wound management, this article focuses on assessing patients with chronic wounds, optimizing wound healing with effective wound-bed preparation, and selecting an appropriate dressing.

Wound chronicity and cause

Developing an appropriate plan of care hinges on conducting a thorough, accurate evaluation of both the patient and the wound. The first step is to determine whether the wound is acute or chronic.
•    A chronic wound is one that fails to heal within a reasonable time—usually
3 months.
•    An acute wound heals more quickly, causing minimal functional loss in the part of the body with the wound.
Identifying the cause of the wound also is essential. If the wound etiology is unknown, explore the patient’s medical history (including medication history) for clues to possible causes. Also review the patient’s history for conditions that could impede wound healing. (See What factors hamper healing? by clicking the PDF icon above)
Other important aspects of assessment include evaluating the patient’s nutritional status, quantifying the level of pain (if present), and gauging the patient’s self-care abilities.

General physical appearance

Conduct a general head-to-toe physical examination, focusing on the patient’s height, weight, and skin characteristics.

Height, weight, and weight trend

On admission, the patient’s height and weight should be measured to ensure appropriate nutritional and pharmacologic management. After a weight gain or loss, various factors may complicate wound healing. For instance, involuntary weight loss and protein-energy malnutrition may occur in both acute-care and long-term-care patients.

Especially note trends in your patient’s weight. For a long-term-care patient, a 5% weight loss over 30 days or a 10% loss over 180 days is considered involuntary. Arrange for a nutritional consult for any patient with an involuntary weight loss, as adequate nutrition is essential for general well-being and wound healing. (See A wound on the mend by clicking the PDF icon above.)

Skin color

Evaluate the patient’s skin color in light of ethnic background. If you note erythema—especially on a pressure point over a bony prominence—examine this area carefully for nonblanching erythema. Keep in mind that darkly pigmented skin doesn’t show such erythema and subsequent blanching, yet the patient may still be in jeopardy. So in dark-skinned patients, check for differences in skin color, temperature, or firmness compared to adjacent tissue; these differences may signify skin compromise.

Skin texture and turgor

Generally, healthy skin feels smooth and firm and has an even surface and good turgor (elasticity). To test turgor, gently grasp and pull up a fold of skin on a site such as the anterior chest below the clavicle. Does the skin return to place almost immediately after you release it, or does it stand up (“tent”)? Tenting indicates dehydration. But keep in mind that skin loses elasticity with age, so elderly patients normally have decreased turgor.

Skin temperature

With normal circulatory status, the skin is warm and its temperature is similar bilaterally. Areas of increased warmth or coolness suggest infection or compromised circulation. Be sure to check the temperature of skin surrounding the wound.

Wound assessment

Proper wound assessment can significantly influence patient outcome. Measure the wound carefully and document the condition of the wound bed. Remember that accurate descriptions are essential for guiding ongoing wound care. Repeat wound measurement and wound-bed assessment at least weekly, after the wound bed has been cleaned and debrided.

Keep in mind that assessing a chronic wound can be challenging. Wounds commonly have irregular shapes that can change quickly. Also, the multiple clinicians caring for the same patient may each describe the wound a bit differently.

Wound location

Note the precise anatomic location of the wound, as this can influence the wound care plan. A venous ulcer on the lower leg, for instance, requires different care than an arterial ulcer in the same site or a pressure ulcer on the ischium.

Circumference and depth

Use a paper or plastic measuring device to measure wound circumference and depth in centimeters (cm) or millimeters (mm). To promote accurate assessment of healing, be sure to use the same reference points each time you measure the wound.

You can use several methods to measure circumference. The most commonly used method of measurement is done in the head to toe direction. Measure the wound at its greatest length in that direction & measure the width at a 90 degree angle, at the widest point of the wound. Then multiply these two measurements (greatest length x greatest width) to obtain the total wound area. Although such linear measurements are imprecise, they yield gross information relative to wound healing when repeated over time.

Classify wound depth as partial thickness or full thickness.
•    Partial-thickness wounds are limited to the skin layers and don’t penetrate the dermis. They usually heal by reepithelialization, in which epidermal cells regenerate and cover the wound. Abrasions, lacerations, and blisters are examples of partial-thickness wounds.
•    Full-thickness wounds involve tissue loss below the dermis.
(Note: Pressure ulcers usually are classified by a four-stage system and diabetic foot ulcers by a grading system. Both systems are beyond this article’s scope.)
Measure and record wound depth based on the deepest area of tissue loss. To measure depth, gently place an appropriate device (such as a foam-tipped applicator) vertically in the deepest part of the wound, and mark the applicator at the patient’s skin level. Then measure from the end of the applicator to the mark to obtain depth.

Surrounding skin and tissue

Inspect for and document any erythema, edema, or ecchymosis within 4 cm of the wound edges, and reevaluate for these signs frequently. Because compromised skin near the wound is at risk for breakdown, preventive measures may be necessary.

Appearance of wound-bed tissue

Document viable tissue in the wound bed as granulation, epithelial, muscle, or subcutaneous tissue. Granulation tissue is connective tissue containing multiple small blood vessels, which aid rapid healing of the wound bed; appearing red or pink, it commonly looks shiny and granular. Epithelial tissue consists of regenerated epidermal cells across the wound bed; it may be shiny and silvery.

Check for nonviable tissue (also called necrotic, slough, or fibrin slough tissue), which may impede wound healing. It may vary in color from black or tan to yellow, and may adhere firmly or loosely to the wound bed. (See Picturing a necrotic wound by clicking the PDF icon above.)

Be sure to document the range of colors visible throughout the wound. Identify the color that covers the largest percentage of the wound bed. This color—and its significance—guide dressing selection.

Wound exudate

Document the amount, color, and odor of exudate (drainage) in the wound. Exudate with high protease levels and low growth factor levels may impede healing.

If the wound is covered by an occlusive dressing, assess exudate after the wound has been cleaned. Describe the amount of exudate as none, minimal, moderate, or heavy.

Describe exudate color as serous, serosanguineous, sanguineous, or purulent. Serous exudate is clear and watery, with no debris or blood present. Serosanguineous exudate is clear, watery, and tinged pink or pale red, denoting presence of blood. Sanguineous exudate is bloody, indicating active bleeding. Purulent exudate may range from yellow to green to brown or tan.

Describe wound odor as absent, faint, moderate, or strong. Note whether the odor is present only during dressing removal, if it disappears after the dressing is discarded, or if it permeates the room.

Wound edges

Wound edges indicate the epithelialization trend and suggest the possible cause and chronicity of the wound. The edges should attach to the wound bed. Edges that are rolled (a condition called epibole) indicate a chronic wound, in which epithelial cells are unable to adhere to a moist, healthy wound bed and can’t migrate across and resurface the wound.

Undermining and tracts

Gently probe around the wound edges and in the wound bed to check for undermining and tracts. Undermining, which may occur around the edges, presents as a space between the intact skin and wound bed (resembling a roof over part of the wound). It commonly results from shear forces in conjunction with sustained pressure. A tract, or tunnel, is a channel extending from one part of the wound through subcutaneous tissue or muscle to another part.

Measure the depth of a tract or undermining by inserting an appropriate device into the wound as far as it will go without forcing it. Then mark the skin on the outside where you can see or feel the applicator tip. Document your findings based on a clock face, with 12 o’clock representing the patient’s head and 6 o’clock denoting the feet. For instance, you might note “2.0-cm undermining from 7:00 to 9:00 position.”

Pain level

Ask the patient to quantify the level of pain caused by the wound, using the pain scale designated by your facility. Find out which pain-management techniques have relieved your patient’s pain in the past; as appropriate, incorporate these into a pain-management plan. Reevaluate the patient’s pain level regularly.

Wound-bed preparation

An evolving science, wound-bed preparation is crucial for minimizing or removing barriers to healing. The goal is to minimize factors that impair healing and maximize the effects of wound care. The key elements of wound-bed preparation are controlling bioburden and maintaining moisture balance. (For online resources on wound-bed preparation and other wound-care topics, see Where to get more information by clicking the PDF icon above.)

Controlling bioburden

Necrotic tissue and exudate harbor bacteria. A wound’s bioburden—the number of contaminating microbes—contributes to poor healing. All chronic wounds are considered contaminated or colonized, but not necessarily infected. In a colonized wound, healing is impeded as bacteria compete for nutrients; also, bacteria have harmful byproducts. To control bioburden, the wound must be cleaned and necrotic tissue must be debrided.

Cleaning the wound. Clean the wound before assessing it and applying a dressing. Use a noncytotoxic agent (typically, potable water, normal saline irrigating solution, or an appropriate wound-cleaning agent). Anti­septic solutions generally aren’t recommended for wound irrigation or dressings because they’re toxic to fibroblasts and other wound-repairing cells. If you must use such a solution, make sure it’s well diluted.

To ensure gentle cleaning or irrigation, pour solution over the wound bed or gently flush the wound with solution (using a 60-mL catheter-tip syringe) until the drainage clears. Know that pressurized irrigation techniques and whirlpool therapy aren’t recommended for wound cleaning because they disturb cell proliferation in the wound bed.

Debriding the wound. Debridement removes slough and necrotic tissue. Nonselective debridement techniques remove any type of tissue within the wound bed, whereas selective methods remove only necrotic tissue. (See Wound debridement techniques by clicking the PDF icon below.)

Maintaining moisture balance

To maintain moisture balance in the wound bed, you must manage exudate and keep the wound bed moist. The proper dressing (which may stay in place for days or longer) supports moist wound healing and exudate management. To minimize fluid pooling, a drain may be inserted into the wound. Negative-pressure wound therapy also may aid removal of excess exudate.

Choosing an appropriate dressing

The wound dressing plays a major role in maintaining moisture balance. Dressing selection is challenging because of the large number and variety of dressings available. Each product has specific actions, benefits, and drawbacks, so determining which dressing best suits the patient’s needs is a multifaceted process.

Dressing choice depends on such factors as wound type and appearance, exudate, presence or absence of pain, and required dressing change frequency. (See Dressings Options by clicking the PDF icon above.)

In a traditional dressing, gauze is applied in layers. The initial (contact) layer in the wound bed absorbs drainage and wicks it to the next layer; most often, this layer consists of woven cotton gauze or synthetic gauze. Remove the gauze gently, because it may be stuck to the wound or incision (especially if the gauze is cotton). For easier removal, moisten the dressing with normal saline solution to loosen it.

With a traditional dressing, the cover layer or secondary dressing is an abdominal pad with a “no-strike-through” layer next to the outside of the dressing. Be aware that wet-to-dry dressings are highly discouraged for their nonselective debriding effect and inability to provide a moist wound bed.

Reassess the patient’s wound at least weekly (after preparing the wound bed and dressing the wound) to determine healing progress. Keep in mind that wound-care management is a collaborative effort. Once you’ve assessed the patient, discuss your findings and subsequent wound management with other members of the team.

Wound care wisdom

Getting wiser about wound care will help your patients achieve good outcomes. Poor wound healing can be frustrating to patients, family members, and healthcare providers alike. Chronic wounds may necessitate lifestyle changes and lead to severe physical consequences ranging from infection to loss of function and even death. By performing careful assessment, tailoring patients’ wound care to wound etiology, and using evidence-based protocols to manage wounds, you can promote speedier wound healing, help lower morbidity, and improve quality of life.

Selected references
Bryant RA, Nix DP. Acute and Chronic Wounds: Current Management Concepts. 4th ed. St. Louis, MO: Mosby; 2011.

Gardener SE, Frantz R, Hillis SL, Park H, Scherubel M. Diagnostic validity of semiquantitative swab cultures. Wounds. 2007;(19)2:31-38.

Krasner DL, Rodeheaver GT, Sibbald RG. Chronic Wound Care: A Clinical Source Book for Healthcare Professionals. 4th ed. Wayne, PA: HMP Communications; 2007.
Langemo DK, Brown G. Skin fails too: acute, chronic, and end-stage skin failure. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2006;19(4):206-211.

Langemo DK, Anderson J, Hanson D, Hunter S, Thompson P. Measuring wound length, width, and area: which technique? Adv Skin Wound Care. 2008;21:42-45.

Milne C, Armand OC, Lassie M. A comparison of collagenase to hydrogel dressings in wound debridement. Wounds. 2010:22(11):270-274.

National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel and European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel. Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers: Clinical Practice Guideline. Washington, DC: National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel; 2009.

Ovington LG. Hanging wet-to-dry dressings out to dry. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2002;15(2):79-86.

Sibbald RG, Coutts P, Woo KY. Reduction of bacterial burden and pain in chronic wounds using a new polyhexamethylene biguanide antimicrobial foam dressing—clinical trial results. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2011;24(2):78-84.

Solway DR, Consalter M, Levinson DJ. Microbial cellulose wound dressing in the treatment of skin tears in the frail elderly. Wounds. 2010:22(1):17-19.

Wound Ostomy and Continence Nurses Society. Guideline for Prevention and Management of Pressure Ulcers. Mt. Laurel, NJ: Author; 2010

Patricia A. Slachta is a Clinical Nurse Specialist at The Queens Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii and an adjunct nursing instructor at the Technical College of the Lowcountry in Beaufort, South Carolina.

Read More