Associations Among Skin Surface pH, Temperature, and Bacterial Burden in Wounds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
GENERAL PURPOSE: To present a cross-sectional cohort study conducted to assess the association between wound pH, local infection, and deep/surrounding infection. TARGET AUDIENCE: This continuing education activity is intended for physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and nurses with an interest in skin and wound care. LEARNING OBJECTIVES/OUTCOMES: After participating in this educational activity, the participant should be better able to:1. Synthesize the background information associated with the study assessing the association between wound pH, local infection, and deep/surrounding infection.2. Summarize the results of the study presented here. ABSTRACT: BACKGROUNDWounds with a higher pH often demonstrate lower rates of healing. Local and deep/surrounding infection can be diagnosed with the validated NERDS and STONEES clinical signs, respectively. This study assessed the association between wound pH, local infection, and deep/surrounding infection. METHODS: A 100-patient prospective cross-sectional cohort study was conducted with leg and foot wounds. Wound pH was measured using pH indicator strips. The wounds were assessed for clinical signs of local or deep/surrounding infection with the NERDS and STONEES criteria, respectively. Temperature measurements were documented with a handheld infrared skin thermometry device at the wound/periwound site, the equivalent site on the opposite side of the same leg/foot, and the wound mirror image site on the opposite leg/foot. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the mean wound bed pH in patients with superficial critical colonization and those without (P = .837). The wound and periwound maximum temperature measurements were compared with an equivalent temperature on the mirror image on the opposite leg. There was a statistically significant difference in the mean temperature (ΔT) value between patients with deep/surrounding wound infection and three or more positive STONEES criteria (P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Nontouch infrared thermometry comparing maximum mirror image wound temperatures versus the opposite extremities when combined with two or more other STONEES criteria is a significant indicator of deep and surrounding infection. Surface wound bed pH indicator strip measurements do not correlate with local wound infection using the NERDS criteria.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".