MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Clinical Investigation into the Relationship between Increased Periwound Skin Temperature and Local Wound Infection in Patients with Chronic Leg Ulcers

2010· article· en· W1990457625 on OpenAlexaff
Marjorie Fierheller, R. Gary Sibbald

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Skin & Wound Care · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWound Healing and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHumber River Regional HospitalGovernment of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWound infectionSkin temperatureDermatologyWound healingSkin careWound careIntensive care medicineSurgeryNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief PURPOSE: To enhance the clinician's knowledge about the relationship between increased periwound skin temperature and local wound infection in patients with chronic leg ulcers. TARGET AUDIENCE: This continuing education activity is intended for physicians and nurses with an interest in skin and wound care. OBJECTIVE: After participating in this educational activity, the participant should be better able to: Interpret research findings on chronic wound assessment including skin temperature assessments. Examine the study reported in this article for appropriate use of periwound skin temperature assessment. Analyze this study's findings regarding the relationship between skin temperature and chronic wound infection. OBJECTIVE: Increased local temperature is a classic sign of wound infection, and its quantitative measurement has the potential to assist with assessment and diagnosis of chronic deep wound and surrounding skin infection at the bedside. Evidence supporting such use in chronic wound care is very limited. This clinical pilot study was conducted in an attempt to quantify the relationship between increased periwound skin temperature and wound infection, as well as validate use of a handheld infrared thermometer for the wound care practitioner. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Using a cross-sectional design, 2 groups of participants were recruited from a chronic wound clinic: without wounds (n = 20) and with chronic leg ulcers (n = 40). Participant and wound characteristics were documented. All skin temperatures were documented using a handheld infrared thermometer under consistent environmental conditions within the clinic. Data analysis was based on the difference (Δ) in skin temperature (in degrees Fahrenheit) between a target or wound site and an equivalent contralateral control site. Wound infection was identified using the combination of a validated assessment tool and clinical judgment. Supplemental semiquantitative bacterial swabs were collected from all wounds. OUTCOME MEASURES: Descriptive statistics were analyzed using the chi-squared calculation. A Pearson r calculation of test-retest skin temperature data collected from nonwounded participants initially determined reliability of the infrared thermometer. Correlation of increased periwound skin temperature to wound infection was determined by calculation of a 1-way analysis of variance. MAIN RESULTS: The infrared thermometer was found to be reliable (r = 0.939, P = .000 at a 95% confidence interval). A statistically significant relationship between increased periwound skin temperature and wound infection was identified (F = 44.238, P = .000 at a 95% confidence interval). Neither patient nor wound characteristics were significantly different between the participants with noninfected or infected wounds. CONCLUSION: The results of this study demonstrate that incorporating quantitative skin temperature measurement into routine wound assessment provides a timely and reliable method for a wound care practitioner to quantify the heat associated with deep and surrounding skin infection and to monitor ongoing wound status. Study limitations may reduce transferability of these findings to wound types other than chronic leg ulcers. Further research is needed to support and strengthen these results. In this continuing education activity, the authors discuss the relationship between increased periwound skin temperature and wound infection, as well as validate use of a handheld infrared thermometer for the wound care practitioner.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.304 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations212
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Skin & Wound CareSame topicWound Healing and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207