Should alternative endpoints be considered to evaluate outcomes in chronic recalcitrant wounds?

Enoch, S. and Price, Patricia Elaine 2004. Should alternative endpoints be considered to evaluate outcomes in chronic recalcitrant wounds? World Wide Wounds , n/a.

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

Despite inherent differences in the pathophysiology of acute and chronic wounds, including those in the aged, and variations in their progression, 'healing' or 'complete wound closure' is considered to be the primary outcome measure of both wound types. This is also the predefined endpoint in most clinical trials or studies involving wound dressings or devices. This article debates the usage of 'complete wound closure' as the primary endpoint to assess the progress of chronic wounds, both from a clinical and research perspective, and argues that alternative endpoints, either intermediate or surrogate, should be considered to evaluate their outcomes. It reasons why accepting non-healing endpoints such as controlling exudate, minimising or eliminating odour, preventing infection, and relieving pain may be appropriate and in the best interests of some patients, particularly the elderly.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Healthcare Sciences
Subjects:	R Medicine > RC Internal medicine
Uncontrolled Keywords:	chronic wounds; impaired healing; ageing; surrogate endpoints; intermediate endpoints; outcome; health-related quality of life
Publisher:	Surgical Materials Testing Laboratory
ISSN:	1369-2607
Last Modified:	04 Jun 2017 04:03
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/31869

Citation Data

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item