versión impresa ISSN 1134-928X
RESTREPO-MEDRANO, Juan Carlos y VERDU SORIANO, José. Development of a wound healing index for chronic wounds. Gerokomos [online]. 2011, vol.22, n.4, pp.176-183. ISSN 1134-928X. http://dx.doi.org/10.4321/S1134-928X2011000400005.
Objectives: to systematically review the literature on healing measurement tools. To develop a scale for measuring progress towards healing for chronic wounds. Material and methods: the study was conducted in two phases: Phase 1: Systematic review in major databases of health sciences (MEDLINE, CINAHL, WIDEN, SCIELO, LILACS, COCHRANE, IME) from the start of the database until 2009. Search strategy: instrument, tool, ulcer, chronic wound, healing, assessment, validation, reliability, and the same in Spanish, with their corresponding formulations using Booleans AND, OR and truncation term for some of them. The search took place initially in the thesauri and if the word did not exist, in free text. Study design not was taken. GRADE system was used to quality appraisal. Phase 2: modified Delphi study with a group of experts in chronic wounds, to reach consensus on variables that could measure the dimension of "progress towards healing". In the first round started with all variables of the wound and the patient found in the different instruments of the systematic review. In the second round sent the items that had obtained the highest score. Finally sent the final version and experts were asked to rate on a scale of 1 to 4 to obtain the content validity index (CVI). Those variables that had obtained more than 80% CVI were included. Results: the systematic review revealed a number of 8 healing tools as set out in 20 articles (10 articles about PUSH, 3 PSST, 1 DESIGN, 1 PWAT, 1 Sessing Scale, 1 Scale Sussman, 1 WHS, CODED 1, and finally, a literature review to collect 4 of the above). Regardless of the number of items per scale, scale PSST has the best research on validity and reliability. However, most are for pressure ulcers. Only 4 papers studied validity and reliability of scales (PUSH, PSST, DESIGN and CODED). The only scale that has been validated for venous ulcers has also been the PUSH, in English and Portuguese. The only scale found in Spanish is coded, developed in the Basque Country in 2000, but only presents a partial survey. That is why they decided to develop a "de novo" scale for all types of chronic wounds. The scale developed, receives the provisional name of "RESVECH V1.0. Expected results of the assessment and evolution in the healing of chronic wounds". CVI scores obtained by the experts above 80% on all items compose. Is defined, pending the study of validity and reliability, 9 items: size of the lesion, depth/tissue concerned, edges, maceration, perilesional, tunneling, type of tissue in the wound bed, exudate, infection/inflammation, frequency of pain (in last 10 days). The scale is scored numerically and can score ranging from 0 to 40 points, wound healed and the worst possible lesion respectively. Also accompanied by operational definitions of each item and its value-form. Conclusions: we get a scale with, a priori, content validity by expert's assessment.
Palabras clave : Wound healing assessment; measurement tools; nursing; chronic wounds.