MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3001915199

Improving the Quality of Chronic Wound Care Using an Advanced Wound Management Program and Gentian Violet/Methylene Blue-Impregnated Antibacterial (GV/MB) Dressings: A Retrospective Study.

2019· article· en· W3001915199 on OpenAlexaff
Theresa Hurd

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWound Healing and Treatments
Canadian institutionsRegional Municipality of Niagara
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWound careWound healingContext (archaeology)PopulationChronic woundSurgeryIntensive care medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Comprehensive wound management programs that employ a standardized integrated care bundle (ICB) and advanced wound dressings are generally recognized to decrease healing times and treatment costs. The purpose of this study was to compare wound healing rates and cost efficiencies as measured by nursing-care requirements for patients not on an ICB versus patients on an ICB and using a gentian violet/methylene blue-impregnated (GV/MB) antimicrobial advanced wound dressing. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The comprehensive wound management programs enabled continuous, standardized measurement of each patient's wound episode from admission with a wound to healing and discharge. Data was recorded over 24 months from 2016 to 2018. The variables recorded for each patient included: wound healing time (number of weeks), wound acuity based on the Bates-Jensen Wound Assessment Tool (BWAT), a comorbidity index (using the Charlson Comorbidity Index), and the number of wound dressing changes. The wound dressing changes required a visit by a registered nurse and, therefore, served as an indicator of care delivery costs where the dressing change visit cost was $68 (CAD). RESULTS: A total of 6300 patients (25% of the total study population) were identified as using GV/MB dressings within the context of an ICB. The mean healing time for these patients was accelerated more than 50% versus patients not on an ICB. The average total cost of patient care was reduced by more than 75% from diagnosis to wound healing when patients were on an ICB with GV/MB dressings. These results compared well to patients on ICBs that had other types of advanced dressings. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates that a comprehensive wound management program based on integrated care bundles in conjunction with GV/MB dressings can be a highly-effective clinical option. The benefits showed significant reductions in healing times and treatment costs.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicWound Healing and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207