Premium
Wound healing outcomes: Using big data and a modified intent‐to‐treat method as a metric for reporting healing rates
Author(s) -
Ennis William J.,
Hoffman Rachel A.,
Gurtner Geoffrey C.,
Kirsner Robert S.,
Gordon Hanna M.
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
wound repair and regeneration
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.847
H-Index - 109
eISSN - 1524-475X
pISSN - 1067-1927
DOI - 10.1111/wrr.12575
Subject(s) - medicine , comparability , wound care , observational study , metric (unit) , consistency (knowledge bases) , health care , descriptive statistics , population , sample (material) , sample size determination , family medicine , intensive care medicine , operations management , statistics , pathology , geometry , mathematics , environmental health , chemistry , combinatorics , chromatography , economics , economic growth
Abstract Chronic wounds are increasing in prevalence and are a costly problem for the US healthcare system and throughout the world. Typically outcomes studies in the field of wound care have been limited to small clinical trials, comparative effectiveness cohorts and attempts to extrapolate results from claims databases. As a result, outcomes in real world clinical settings may differ from these published studies. This study presents a modified intent‐to‐treat framework for measuring wound outcomes and measures the consistency of population based outcomes across two distinct settings. In this retrospective observational analysis, we describe the largest to date, cohort of patient wound outcomes derived from 626 hospital based clinics and one academic tertiary care clinic. We present the results of a modified intent‐to‐treat analysis of wound outcomes as well as demographic and descriptive data. After applying the exclusion criteria, the final analytic sample includes the outcomes from 667,291 wounds in the national sample and 1,788 wounds in the academic sample. We found a consistent modified intent to treat healing rate of 74.6% from the 626 clinics and 77.6% in the academic center. We recommend that a standard modified intent to treat healing rate be used to report wound outcomes to allow for consistency and comparability in measurement across providers, payers and healthcare systems.