Conectar
This scoping review investigates the use of point-of-care infrared thermography devices for assessing various wound types. A comprehensive search across four databases yielded 76 studies published between 2010 and 2024 that met the inclusion criteria. The review highlights thermography applications in burns, surgical wounds, diabetic foot ulcers, pressure injuries, and other lower limb wounds. Key findings indicate its effectiveness in detecting early signs of inflammation and healing delays, facilitating timely interventions. The technology shows promise in accurately predicting wound healing trajectories and assessing treatment outcomes. Recent advancements have made thermographic devices more affordable and user-friendly, expanding their clinical potential. However, challenges persist, including reimbursement, training requirements, and integration with electronic medical records (EMRs), with EMR integration identified as a critical barrier to widespread adoption. While preliminary findings are promising, the current evidence base is constrained by small sample sizes, retrospective study designs, and limited consideration of skin tone variability. Large, prospective studies are essential to validate the clinical utility of thermography in wound care and to inform the development of standardised protocols that support equitable, bias-reduced assessment across diverse populations. Addressing these gaps is critical for advancing research, enhancing clinician training, and improving patient outcomes in wound care. Overall, point-of-care thermography demonstrates significant potential to enhance wound assessment and monitoring, thereby elevating care quality and patient outcomes.
Wound care is a complex procedure and the related research may include many variables. Deficiencies in the sample inclusion and exclusion criteria may limit the generalizability of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for wound patients in the real world. This study aimed to evaluate deficiencies in reporting the inclusion and exclusion criteria and the characteristics of patients in RCTs of pressure injuries (PI) therapeutic interventions. We conducted a systematic methodological review in which 40 full text RCTs of PI treatment interventions published in English, from 2008 to 2020, were identified. Data on the general characteristics of the included RCTs and data about inclusion/exclusion criteria and characteristics of patients were collected. The inclusion/exclusion criteria were categorized into five domains (definition of disease, precision, safety, ethical/legal and administrative). Study duration (in weeks) was 8.0 (quartile 1: 2.0; quartile 3: 48.0); only 5.0% of the trials mentioned race, skin colour or ethnicity, and 37.5% reported the duration of the wound. Only 9 (22.5%) studies reported the drugs that the included patients were using and 10 (25.0%) RCTs reported adverse events. The presence of the five domains was observed only in 12.5% of RCTs and only 12 (30.0%) had the precision domain. Much more research is required in systematic assessments of the external validity of trials because there is substantial disparity between the information that is provided by RCTs and the information that is required by clinicians. We concluded that there are deficiencies in reporting of data related to inclusion/exclusion criteria and characteristics of patients of RCTs assessing PI therapeutic interventions.
FreshRSS 