Compare Wound Sampling Methods Efficacy in Microbiology Culture

June 10, 2024 updated by: Long Zhang, Peking University Third Hospital

Slough in Acute or Chronic Wounds for the Diagnosis of Microbiology Cultivation

Slough was a visible indicator of biofilm, which was the most available specimen from acute and chronic wounds. However, studies believed that slough were poorly accurate, and that the Levine swab was more recommended for sampling bacterial culture. This study aimed to compare slough with swab sample and analyze the consistency.

Study Overview

Status

Active, not recruiting

Study Type

Observational

Enrollment (Actual)

131

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Beijing
      • Beijing, Beijing, China, 010
        • Peking University 3rd Hospital

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sampling Method

Probability Sample

Study Population

This was a single-center, retrospective, cross-sectional study, including 131 patients with acute or chronic wounds treated in Wound Healing Center of Peking University Third Hospital from October 2022 to October 2023

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Patients with acute and chronic wounds who were first seen at the Wound Care Centre of Peking University Third Hospital from October 2022 to October 2023;
  2. Patients who have followed the wound sample collection SOP to simultaneously take wound swabs and putrefactive samples and send them for bacterial culture;;
  3. Patients aged 18 years or older;

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Patients who had been taken only one of the wound samples, either swab or slough;
  2. The swab collection did not meet the deifinitions for the exudate method or the Levine technique;
  3. Bacterial culture profile was incomplete didn't meet the requirement of the trial.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort
slough
slough as the wound specimen for microbiology cultivation
swap
swap as the wound specimen for microbiology cultivation

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
cohen's k coefficient of Gram Stain between Slough and Swap Specimens
Time Frame: Day 0, patients' the first site in wound healing center
compare the difference of Gram Stain after bacterial culture between Slough and Swap Specimens, by using statistics of cohen's k coefficient,values of κ from The κ coefficients in 0.81 to 1 waeres interpreted as excellentalmost perfect concordance, with 0.61 to 0.80 asrepresented substantial, 0.41 to 0.60 as mean moderate, 0.21 to 0.40 as fair, and 0 to 0.20 as slight.
Day 0, patients' the first site in wound healing center

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
cohen's k coefficient of Common pathogens between Slough and Swap Specimens
Time Frame: Day 0, patients' the first site in wound healing center
compare the difference of Common pathogens after bacterial culture between Slough and Swap Specimens, by using statistics of cohen's k coefficient,values of κ from The κ coefficients in 0.81 to 1 waeres interpreted as excellentalmost perfect concordance, with 0.61 to 0.80 asrepresented substantial, 0.41 to 0.60 as mean moderate, 0.21 to 0.40 as fair, and 0 to 0.20 as slight.
Day 0, patients' the first site in wound healing center
agreements in microbiology cultivation between slough and swap
Time Frame: Day 0, patients' the first site in wound healing center
compare the agreement of pathogens after bacterial culture between Slough and Swap Specimens, by percentage.
Day 0, patients' the first site in wound healing center

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

October 1, 2022

Primary Completion (Actual)

October 1, 2023

Study Completion (Estimated)

May 1, 2025

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

May 26, 2024

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 10, 2024

First Posted (Actual)

June 14, 2024

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

June 14, 2024

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 10, 2024

Last Verified

June 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Microbial Colonization

Subscribe