Questa pagina è stata tradotta automaticamente e l'accuratezza della traduzione non è garantita. Si prega di fare riferimento al Versione inglese per un testo di partenza.

Using WoundPilot to Support Wound Care Decisions in Patients With Chronic Wounds

24 aprile 2026 aggiornato da: University Ghent

Evaluation of the Effect of WoundPilot on the Accuracy and Consistency of Clinical Decision-Making in Chronic Wound Care: A Randomized Parallel Vignette Study Among Primary Care Nurses

This study evaluates whether a digital decision support tool, called WoundPilot, can help primary care nurses make more accurate and consistent decisions when caring for patients with chronic wounds.

In daily practice, treatment decisions for chronic wounds can vary between clinicians, even when they assess the same patient. This variation may lead to delays in appropriate care, inconsistent treatment choices, or unnecessary referrals. WoundPilot was developed to guide clinicians through a structured wound assessment and link this assessment to clear treatment recommendations.

In this study, primary care nurses will assess a series of clinical cases either with or without the support of WoundPilot. Their decisions will be compared with an expert reference standard to determine whether the use of WoundPilot improves the accuracy of decisions and reduces differences between nurses.

The results of this study will help determine whether WoundPilot can support more consistent and evidence-based wound care in clinical practice.

Panoramica dello studio

Stato

Non ancora reclutamento

Condizioni

Intervento / Trattamento

Descrizione dettagliata

Background Clinical decision-making in chronic wound care shows considerable variability, even when clinicians are presented with similar patient information. This variability may result in delayed or inappropriate treatment, inconsistent use of therapies, or failure to escalate care when clinically indicated.

Structured clinical decision support systems (CDSS) aim to reduce unwarranted variation by guiding clinicians through predefined assessment steps and linking these to management pathways. WoundPilot is an evidence-informed CDSS developed to support structured wound assessment and treatment decision-making in primary care.

Objective The primary objective is to evaluate the effect of WoundPilot on the accuracy and consistency of clinical decision-making in chronic wound care among primary care nurses.

Secondary objectives are to:

  • Assess alignment of wound assessment decisions with an expert reference standard
  • Evaluate whether WoundPilot reduces variability between nurses
  • Assess whether nurses better recognize and translate clinical changes
  • Evaluate usability of WoundPilot using the Dutch System Usability Scale (D-SUS)

Study Design

This study is a randomized parallel vignette study conducted among primary care nurses. Participants are randomly assigned to:

  • Intervention group: assessment of clinical cases using WoundPilot
  • Control group: assessment based on usual clinical reasoning without decision support Each participant evaluates a set of standardized clinical cases representing patients with chronic wounds.

Methods Participants include primary care nurses involved in wound care decision-making in home care or nursing home settings.

In the intervention group, participants receive a short training on WoundPilot and use the tool to assess clinical cases. In the control group, participants assess the same type of cases using their usual reasoning and verbalize their decision-making process.

For each case, participants make decisions regarding wound assessment and treatment planning, including supportive therapy, antimicrobial use, debridement, dressing selection, and referral.

An expert reference standard is established by a panel of wound care experts. Participant decisions are compared to this reference.

Outcomes

The primary outcome is the correctness of treatment decisions compared with the expert reference standard. Secondary outcomes include:

  • Correctness of wound assessment decisions
  • Between-nurse variability in decisions
  • Recognition and interpretation of clinical change
  • Usability of WoundPilot (Dutch System Usability Scale) Agreement with the expert reference and between participants will be quantified using appropriate statistical methods, including kappa statistics and mixed-effects models.

Significance This study evaluates whether a structured clinical decision support system can improve the accuracy and consistency of clinical decision-making in chronic wound care. Findings may inform the role of digital decision support tools in supporting evidence-based practice in primary care.

Tipo di studio

Interventistico

Iscrizione (Stimato)

40

Fase

  • Non applicabile

Contatti e Sedi

Questa sezione fornisce i recapiti di coloro che conducono lo studio e informazioni su dove viene condotto lo studio.

Contatto studio

Backup dei contatti dello studio

Luoghi di studio

  • Belgio
    • Oost-Vlaanderen
      • Ghent, Oost-Vlaanderen, Belgio, 9000
        • Ghent University Hospital
        • Contatto:
        • Contatto:
        • Sub-investigatore:
          • Steven Smet, Master
        • Investigatore principale:
          • Hilde Beele, PhD
        • Sub-investigatore:
          • Dimitri Beeckman, PhD

Criteri di partecipazione

I ricercatori cercano persone che corrispondano a una certa descrizione, chiamata criteri di ammissibilità. Alcuni esempi di questi criteri sono le condizioni generali di salute di una persona o trattamenti precedenti.

Criteri di ammissibilità

Età idonea allo studio

  • Adulto
  • Adulto più anziano

Accetta volontari sani

Sì

Descrizione

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Primary care nurses involved in wound care decision-making
  • Nurses working in home care or nursing home settings
  • Nurses who assess and/or adapt wound management in clinical practice
  • Nurses with a qualification corresponding to European Qualification Framework (EQF) level 5 or 6
  • Willing and able to provide informed consent

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Nurses not involved in wound care decision-making
  • Nurses not working in a primary care setting
  • Inability to understand the study procedures or complete the assessment tasks
  • Refusal or inability to provide informed consent

Piano di studio

Questa sezione fornisce i dettagli del piano di studio, compreso il modo in cui lo studio è progettato e ciò che lo studio sta misurando.

Come è strutturato lo studio?

Dettagli di progettazione

  • Scopo principale: Trattamento
  • Assegnazione: Randomizzato
  • Modello interventistico: Assegnazione parallela
  • Mascheramento: Nessuno (etichetta aperta)

Armi e interventi

Gruppo di partecipanti / Arm
Intervento / Trattamento
Sperimentale: Reasoning with decision support

Participants in this arm assess standardized clinical cases of patients with chronic wounds using WoundPilot, a digital clinical decision support system (CDSS).

WoundPilot guides users through a structured, stepwise wound assessment, including evaluation of wound etiology, infection, wound evolution, wound bed characteristics, exudate, and wound edges. Based on the assessment, the system provides structured guidance to support treatment decision-making, including recommendations on supportive therapy, local wound management, and referral.

Participants receive a brief training on the use of WoundPilot prior to the assessment and then independently evaluate a set of clinical cases using the tool.
Dispositivo: WoundPilot

WoundPilot is a software-based clinical decision support system (CDSS) designed to support structured wound assessment and treatment decision-making in primary care.

The system guides users through a stepwise assessment process using predefined decision nodes, including evaluation of wound etiology, infection, wound evolution, wound bed characteristics, exudate, and wound edges. Based on the entered information, WoundPilot provides structured guidance to support treatment planning, including recommendations on supportive therapy, local wound management, and referral.

The system incorporates evidence-informed clinical pathways and aims to standardize wound assessment and reduce variability in clinical decision-making.
Nessun intervento: Usual reasoning

Participants in this arm assess standardized clinical cases of patients with chronic wounds using their usual clinical reasoning, without the support of a clinical decision support system.

Participants independently evaluate each case and make decisions regarding wound assessment and treatment planning, including supportive therapy, local wound management, and referral. They are asked to verbalize their reasoning during the assessment process, which is recorded for subsequent analysis.

No additional training or decision support tool is provided.

Cosa sta misurando lo studio?

Misure di risultato primarie

Misura del risultato
Misura Descrizione
Lasso di tempo
Accuracy of Treatment Decisions Compared With an Expert Reference Standard
Lasso di tempo: During a single assessment session (approximately 2 hours)
Accuracy of treatment decisions will be assessed by comparing each participant's treatment decisions for standardized chronic wound cases with an expert reference standard. Treatment decisions include supportive therapy, antimicrobial therapy, wound cleansing, debridement, choice of wound product, management of wound edges or wound environment, protection of exposed bone or tendon when applicable, referral or contact with another healthcare professional or department, wound swab, and additional technical investigations. Accuracy will be analyzed at the level of individual treatment decision components and as a composite correctness score per case.
During a single assessment session (approximately 2 hours)

Misure di risultato secondarie

Misura del risultato
Misura Descrizione
Lasso di tempo
Alignment of Wound Assessment Decisions With Expert Reference Standard
Lasso di tempo: During a single assessment session (approximately 2 hours)
Accuracy of wound assessment decisions will be evaluated by comparing participant assessments with an expert reference standard. This includes classification of wound type, assessment of infection (local, spreading, or systemic), evaluation of wound evolution, wound bed characteristics, presence of hypergranulation or exposed structures, amount of exudate, and assessment of wound edges and surrounding skin.
During a single assessment session (approximately 2 hours)
Between-Nurse Variability in Treatment Decisions
Lasso di tempo: During a single assessment session (approximately 2 hours)
Variability in treatment decisions between participants will be assessed within each study group. Agreement between participants will be quantified using statistical measures such as Fleiss' kappa to evaluate consistency of treatment decisions across standardized cases.
During a single assessment session (approximately 2 hours)
Between-Nurse Variability in Wound Assessment Decisions
Lasso di tempo: During a single assessment session (approximately 2 hours)
Variability in wound assessment decisions between participants will be evaluated within each study group. Agreement will be quantified using appropriate statistical methods (e.g., Fleiss' kappa) to assess consistency in the evaluation of decision-critical wound parameters.
During a single assessment session (approximately 2 hours)
Recognition and Interpretation of Clinical Change
Lasso di tempo: During a single assessment session (approximately 2 hours)
Participants' ability to recognize and correctly interpret clinical changes over time will be assessed by comparing decisions between initial and follow-up case scenarios. Correct identification of wound evolution and appropriate adaptation of treatment decisions will be evaluated against the expert reference standard.
During a single assessment session (approximately 2 hours)
Usability of WoundPilot (Dutch System Usability Scale)
Lasso di tempo: During a single assessment session (approximately 2 hours)
Usability of WoundPilot will be assessed using the Dutch System Usability Scale (D-SUS), a validated 10-item questionnaire scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The D-SUS provides a total score ranging from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better usability.
During a single assessment session (approximately 2 hours)

Collaboratori e investigatori

Qui è dove troverai le persone e le organizzazioni coinvolte in questo studio.

Sponsor

University Ghent

Investigatori

  • Cattedra di studio: Steven Smet, Master, University Hospital, Ghent
  • Investigatore principale: Hilde Beele, PhD, University Hospital, Ghent
  • Cattedra di studio: Dimitri Beeckman, PhD, University Ghent

Pubblicazioni e link utili

La persona responsabile dell'inserimento delle informazioni sullo studio fornisce volontariamente queste pubblicazioni. Questi possono riguardare qualsiasi cosa relativa allo studio.

Pubblicazioni generali

Studiare le date dei record

Queste date tengono traccia dell'avanzamento della registrazione dello studio e dell'invio dei risultati di sintesi a ClinicalTrials.gov. I record degli studi e i risultati riportati vengono esaminati dalla National Library of Medicine (NLM) per assicurarsi che soddisfino specifici standard di controllo della qualità prima di essere pubblicati sul sito Web pubblico.

Studia le date principali

Inizio studio (Stimato)

1 giugno 2026

Completamento primario (Stimato)

1 settembre 2026

Completamento dello studio (Stimato)

1 settembre 2026

Date di iscrizione allo studio

Primo inviato

16 aprile 2026

Primo inviato che soddisfa i criteri di controllo qualità

24 aprile 2026

Primo Inserito (Effettivo)

1 maggio 2026

Aggiornamenti dei record di studio

Ultimo aggiornamento pubblicato (Effettivo)

1 maggio 2026

Ultimo aggiornamento inviato che soddisfa i criteri QC

24 aprile 2026

Ultimo verificato

1 aprile 2026

Maggiori informazioni

Termini relativi a questo studio

Parole chiave

Termini MeSH pertinenti aggiuntivi

Altri numeri di identificazione dello studio

  • ONZ-2026-0172
  • WoundPilot (Altro identificatore: Ghent University Hospital)

Piano per i dati dei singoli partecipanti (IPD)

Hai intenzione di condividere i dati dei singoli partecipanti (IPD)?

NO

Descrizione del piano IPD

Individual participant data (IPD) will not be shared due to the small sample size and the risk of potential re-identification of participants, as well as the inclusion of qualitative data (e.g., verbalized reasoning) that may contain indirectly identifiable information.

Informazioni su farmaci e dispositivi, documenti di studio

Studia un prodotto farmaceutico regolamentato dalla FDA degli Stati Uniti

No

Studia un dispositivo regolamentato dalla FDA degli Stati Uniti

No

Queste informazioni sono state recuperate direttamente dal sito web clinicaltrials.gov senza alcuna modifica. In caso di richieste di modifica, rimozione o aggiornamento dei dettagli dello studio, contattare register@clinicaltrials.gov. Non appena verrà implementata una modifica su clinicaltrials.gov, questa verrà aggiornata automaticamente anche sul nostro sito web .

Cerca prove simili

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

CROs by country

CROs in Portugal

Condizioni

Malattie rare

Interventi farmacologici

Supplementi dietetici

Sponsor / Collaboratori

Sedi

Sottoscrivi