Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32030879›Full record

ReviewInternational wound journal2020

Quality indicators for a community-based wound care centre: An integrative review.

Philippa C J Seaton, Robyn P Cant, Henrietta T Trip

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International wound journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Community-Based Wound Care Programs for Unhoused Individuals.Journal of epidemiology and global health · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Philippa C J SeatonCentre for Postgraduate Nursing Studies, University of Otago, Christchurch, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0136-4175
Robyn P CantMonash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5430-3275
Henrietta T TripCentre for Postgraduate Nursing Studies, University of Otago, Christchurch, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5844-3400

Funding

Nurse Maude Association, NZ N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this review was to identify the role and contribution of community-based nurse-led wound care as a service delivery model. Centres increasingly respond proactively to assess and manage wounds at all stages - not only chronic wound care. We conducted an integrative review of literature, searching five databases, 2007-2018. Based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, we systematically approached article selection and all three authors collaborated to chart the study variables, evaluate data, and synthesise results. Eighteen studies were included, representing a range of care models internationally. The findings showed a need for nurse-led clinics to provide evidence-based care using best practice guidelines for all wound types. Wound care practices should be standardised across the particular service and be integrated with higher levels of resources such as investigative services and surgical units. A multi-disciplinary approach was likely to achieve better patient outcomes, while patient-centred care with strong patient engagement was likely to assist patients' compliance with treatment. High-quality community-based wound services should include nursing leadership based on a hub-and-spoke model. This is ideally patient-centred, evidence-based, and underpinned by a commitment to developing innovations in terms of treatment modalities, accessibility, and patient engagement.

Indexed as

Community Health ServicesPractice Patterns, Nurses'Quality Indicators, Health CareHumansSkinSkin UlcerWounds and Injuriescommunitynurse-led clinicsquality of health carewounds

Identifiers

PMID32030879
PMCPMC7949261

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.