Using WoundPilot to Support Wound Care Decisions in Patients With Chronic Wounds
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.
Przegląd badań
Status
Status
Warunki
Warunki
Interwencja / Leczenie
Interwencja / Leczenie
Szczegółowy opis
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.
Typ studiów
Typ studiów
Zapisy (Szacowany)
Zapisy
Faza
Faza
- Nie dotyczy
Kontakty i lokalizacje
Kontakt w sprawie studiów
Kontakt w sprawie studiów
- Nazwa: Steven Smet, Master
- Numer telefonu: +3293328793
- E-mail: Steven.Smet@UZGent.be
Kopia zapasowa kontaktu do badania
- Nazwa: Hilde Beele, PhD
- Numer telefonu: +32 9 332 33 81
- E-mail: Hilde.Beele@uzgent.be
Lokalizacje studiów
-
-
Oost-Vlaanderen
-
Ghent, Oost-Vlaanderen, Belgia, 9000
- Ghent University Hospital
-
Kontakt:
- Steven Smet, Master
- Numer telefonu: +3293328793
- E-mail: Steven.Smet@UZGent.be
-
Kontakt:
- Hilde Beele, PhD
- Numer telefonu: +3293323381
- E-mail: Hilde.Beele@uzgent.be
-
Pod-śledczy:
- Steven Smet, Master
-
Główny śledczy:
- Hilde Beele, PhD
-
Pod-śledczy:
- Dimitri Beeckman, PhD
-
-
Kryteria uczestnictwa
Kryteria kwalifikacji
Kryteria kwalifikacji
Wiek uprawniający do nauki
- Dorosły
- Starszy dorosły
Akceptuje zdrowych ochotników
Opis
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
Plan studiów
Jak projektuje się badanie?
Szczegóły projektu
- Główny cel: Leczenie
- Przydział: Randomizowane
- Model interwencyjny: Przydział równoległy
- Maskowanie: Brak (otwarta etykieta)
Liczba ramion
Broń i interwencje
Grupa uczestników / ArmGrupa uczestników / Arm |
Interwencja / LeczenieInterwencja / Leczenie |
|---|---|
|
Eksperymentalny: 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. |
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. |
|
Brak interwencji: 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. |
Co mierzy badanie?
Podstawowe miary wyniku
Podstawowe miary wyniku
Miara wyniku |
Opis środka |
Ramy czasowe |
|---|---|---|
|
Accuracy of Treatment Decisions Compared With an Expert Reference Standard
Ramy czasowe: 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)
|
Miary wyników drugorzędnych
Miary wyników drugorzędnych
Miara wyniku |
Opis środka |
Ramy czasowe |
|---|---|---|
|
Alignment of Wound Assessment Decisions With Expert Reference Standard
Ramy czasowe: 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
Ramy czasowe: 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
Ramy czasowe: 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
Ramy czasowe: 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)
Ramy czasowe: 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)
|
Współpracownicy i badacze
Sponsor
Sponsor
Śledczy
Śledczy
- Krzesło do nauki: Steven Smet, Master, University Hospital, Ghent
- Główny śledczy: Hilde Beele, PhD, University Hospital, Ghent
- Krzesło do nauki: Dimitri Beeckman, PhD, University Ghent
Publikacje i pomocne linki
Publikacje ogólne
- Smet S, Verhaeghe S, Beeckman D, Fourie A, Beele H. The process of clinical decision-making in chronic wound care: A scenario-based think-aloud study. J Tissue Viability. 2024 May;33(2):231-238. doi: 10.1016/j.jtv.2024.03.002. Epub 2024 Mar 1.
- Smet S, Probst S, Holloway S, Fourie A, Beele H, Beeckman D. The measurement properties of assessment tools for chronic wounds: A systematic review. Int J Nurs Stud. 2021 Sep;121:103998. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2021.103998. Epub 2021 Jun 7.
Daty zapisu na studia
Główne daty studiów
Rozpoczęcie studiów (Szacowany)
Rozpoczęcie studiów
Zakończenie podstawowe (Szacowany)
Zakończenie podstawowe
Ukończenie studiów (Szacowany)
Ukończenie studiów
Daty rejestracji na studia
Pierwszy przesłany
Pierwszy przesłany
Pierwszy przesłany, który spełnia kryteria kontroli jakości
Pierwszy przesłany, który spełnia kryteria kontroli jakości
Pierwszy wysłany (Rzeczywisty)
Pierwszy wysłany
Aktualizacje rekordów badań
Ostatnia wysłana aktualizacja (Rzeczywisty)
Ostatnia wysłana aktualizacja
Ostatnia przesłana aktualizacja, która spełniała kryteria kontroli jakości
Ostatnia przesłana aktualizacja, która spełniała kryteria kontroli jakości
Ostatnia weryfikacja
Ostatnia weryfikacja
Więcej informacji
Terminy związane z tym badaniem
Słowa kluczowe
Dodatkowe istotne warunki MeSH
Inne numery identyfikacyjne badania
Inne numery identyfikacyjne badania
- ONZ-2026-0172
- WoundPilot (Inny identyfikator: Ghent University Hospital)
Plan dla danych uczestnika indywidualnego (IPD)
Planujesz udostępniać dane poszczególnych uczestników (IPD)?
Opis planu IPD
Informacje o lekach i urządzeniach, dokumenty badawcze
Bada produkt leczniczy regulowany przez amerykańską FDA
Bada produkt urządzenia regulowany przez amerykańską FDA
Te informacje zostały pobrane bezpośrednio ze strony internetowej clinicaltrials.gov bez żadnych zmian. Jeśli chcesz zmienić, usunąć lub zaktualizować dane swojego badania, skontaktuj się z register@clinicaltrials.gov. Gdy tylko zmiana zostanie wprowadzona na stronie clinicaltrials.gov, zostanie ona automatycznie zaktualizowana również na naszej stronie internetowej .