[Clinical application of multidisciplinary team in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic refractory wounds].

Q3 Medicine
北京大学学报(医学版) Pub Date : 2025-02-18
Liwei Wang, Bingchuan Liu, Yinyin Qu, Changyi Wu, Yun Tian
{"title":"[Clinical application of multidisciplinary team in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic refractory wounds].","authors":"Liwei Wang, Bingchuan Liu, Yinyin Qu, Changyi Wu, Yun Tian","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To explore the application effectiveness of multidisciplinary team (MDT) in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic refractory wounds, and to provide new ideas for optimizing the clinical diagnosis and treatment of such diseases.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of patients with chronic refractory wounds who underwent surgery at Peking University Third Hospital from January 2015 to October 2023, and a total of 456 patients, including 290 males and 166 females, with an average age of (49.4±16.9) years. According to whether preoperative MDT discussion was conducted, the patients were divided into MDT discussion group and non-MDT discussion group. The overall implementation process of MDT included: Starting and recording with the medical office, collecting data and discussing the initial MDT, informing the patient of the treatment plan and strictly implementing it, and the change of the condition needs to be discussed again by MDT. The general clinical data, anesthesia risk grade, complications (hypertension, diabetes, coronary heart disease), and the etiology and location of chronic refractory wounds between the two groups were compared. The main observational measurements and outcome indicators of treatment effectiveness included the number of surgeries required to achieve wound healing after admission, the recurrence rate after wound healing, the incidence of perioperative complications (pulmonary infection, severe cardiovascular event, vein thrombus embo-lism, cerebral stroke and delirium, <i>etc</i>.), and patient satisfaction score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 189 patients in the MDT discussion group and 267 patients in the non-MDT discussion group. There was no significant statistical difference in the clinical data, such as age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists, comorbidities, etiology, and location of chronic refractory wounds between the two groups (<i>P</i>>0.05). The average number of surgeries required for wound healing in MDT discussion group and non-MDT discussion group was 2.1±1.1 and 2.8±1.6, respectively, with a statistically significant difference (<i>P</i> < 0.001). This difference was also significant in chronic refractory wounds caused by three etiologies: Diabetic ulcer, infection after trauma or surgery, and non-union after radiotherapy (<i>P</i> < 0.05). The recurrence rate of the patients in the non-MDT discussion group after wound healing was 18.0%, slightly higher than that in the MDT discussion group of 14.3% (<i>P</i>>0.05). In terms of perioperative complications, the non-MDT discussion group also had a higher incidence (3.7% <i>vs</i>. 2.6%), but the difference was not statistically significant (<i>P</i>>0.05). In terms of patient satisfaction, the MDT discussion group scored significantly higher (96.5 <i>vs</i>. 91.1, <i>P</i>=0.028).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The MDT mode can significantly reduce the number of surgeries for patients with chronic refractory wounds, improve the effectiveness of therapy and increase patient satisfaction. It is a recommended model for optimizing the clinical diagnosis and treatment effectiveness of chronic refractory wounds.</p>","PeriodicalId":8790,"journal":{"name":"北京大学学报(医学版)","volume":"57 1","pages":"185-191"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11759794/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"北京大学学报(医学版)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To explore the application effectiveness of multidisciplinary team (MDT) in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic refractory wounds, and to provide new ideas for optimizing the clinical diagnosis and treatment of such diseases.

Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical data of patients with chronic refractory wounds who underwent surgery at Peking University Third Hospital from January 2015 to October 2023, and a total of 456 patients, including 290 males and 166 females, with an average age of (49.4±16.9) years. According to whether preoperative MDT discussion was conducted, the patients were divided into MDT discussion group and non-MDT discussion group. The overall implementation process of MDT included: Starting and recording with the medical office, collecting data and discussing the initial MDT, informing the patient of the treatment plan and strictly implementing it, and the change of the condition needs to be discussed again by MDT. The general clinical data, anesthesia risk grade, complications (hypertension, diabetes, coronary heart disease), and the etiology and location of chronic refractory wounds between the two groups were compared. The main observational measurements and outcome indicators of treatment effectiveness included the number of surgeries required to achieve wound healing after admission, the recurrence rate after wound healing, the incidence of perioperative complications (pulmonary infection, severe cardiovascular event, vein thrombus embo-lism, cerebral stroke and delirium, etc.), and patient satisfaction score.

Results: There were 189 patients in the MDT discussion group and 267 patients in the non-MDT discussion group. There was no significant statistical difference in the clinical data, such as age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists, comorbidities, etiology, and location of chronic refractory wounds between the two groups (P>0.05). The average number of surgeries required for wound healing in MDT discussion group and non-MDT discussion group was 2.1±1.1 and 2.8±1.6, respectively, with a statistically significant difference (P < 0.001). This difference was also significant in chronic refractory wounds caused by three etiologies: Diabetic ulcer, infection after trauma or surgery, and non-union after radiotherapy (P < 0.05). The recurrence rate of the patients in the non-MDT discussion group after wound healing was 18.0%, slightly higher than that in the MDT discussion group of 14.3% (P>0.05). In terms of perioperative complications, the non-MDT discussion group also had a higher incidence (3.7% vs. 2.6%), but the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). In terms of patient satisfaction, the MDT discussion group scored significantly higher (96.5 vs. 91.1, P=0.028).

Conclusion: The MDT mode can significantly reduce the number of surgeries for patients with chronic refractory wounds, improve the effectiveness of therapy and increase patient satisfaction. It is a recommended model for optimizing the clinical diagnosis and treatment effectiveness of chronic refractory wounds.

多学科团队在慢性难治性伤口诊治中的临床应用
目的:探讨多学科团队(MDT)在慢性难治性伤口诊治中的应用效果,为优化此类疾病的临床诊治提供新思路。方法:回顾性分析2015年1月至2023年10月在北京大学第三医院行手术治疗的慢性难治性伤口患者的临床资料,共456例,其中男性290例,女性166例,平均年龄(49.4±16.9)岁。根据术前是否进行MDT讨论,将患者分为MDT讨论组和非MDT讨论组。MDT的整体实施过程包括:与医务室启动并记录,收集资料并讨论初始MDT,告知患者治疗方案并严格执行,病情发生变化需要MDT再次讨论。比较两组患者的一般临床资料、麻醉危险等级、并发症(高血压、糖尿病、冠心病)、慢性难治性创面病因及部位。治疗效果的主要观察指标和结局指标包括入院后创面愈合所需手术次数、创面愈合后复发率、围手术期并发症(肺部感染、严重心血管事件、静脉血栓栓塞、脑卒中、谵妄等)发生率、患者满意度评分。结果:MDT讨论组189例,非MDT讨论组267例。两组患者的年龄、性别、体重指数、美国麻醉师学会会诊、并发症、病因、慢性难治性创面部位等临床资料比较,差异均无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。MDT讨论组和非MDT讨论组伤口愈合平均手术次数分别为2.1±1.1次和2.8±1.6次,差异有统计学意义(P < 0.001)。糖尿病性溃疡、外伤或手术后感染、放疗后不愈合三种原因引起的慢性难治性创面,差异均有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。非MDT讨论组患者伤口愈合后复发率为18.0%,略高于MDT讨论组的14.3% (P < 0.05)。在围手术期并发症方面,非mdt讨论组发生率也较高(3.7% vs. 2.6%),但差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。在患者满意度方面,MDT讨论组得分明显更高(96.5比91.1,P=0.028)。结论:MDT模式可显著减少慢性难治性伤口患者的手术次数,提高治疗效果,提高患者满意度。它是优化慢性难治性伤口临床诊断和治疗效果的推荐模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
北京大学学报(医学版)
北京大学学报(医学版) Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9815
期刊介绍: Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban / Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), established in 1959, is a national academic journal sponsored by Peking University, and its former name is Journal of Beijing Medical University. The coverage of the Journal includes basic medical sciences, clinical medicine, oral medicine, surgery, public health and epidemiology, pharmacology and pharmacy. Over the last few years, the Journal has published articles and reports covering major topics in the different special issues (e.g. research on disease genome, theory of drug withdrawal, mechanism and prevention of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases, stomatology, orthopaedic, public health, urology and reproductive medicine). All the topics involve latest advances in medical sciences, hot topics in specific specialties, and prevention and treatment of major diseases. The Journal has been indexed and abstracted by PubMed Central (PMC), MEDLINE/PubMed, EBSCO, Embase, Scopus, Chemical Abstracts (CA), Western Pacific Region Index Medicus (WPR), JSTChina, and almost all the Chinese sciences and technical index systems, including Chinese Science and Technology Paper Citation Database (CSTPCD), Chinese Science Citation Database (CSCD), China BioMedical Bibliographic Database (CBM), CMCI, Chinese Biological Abstracts, China National Academic Magazine Data-Base (CNKI), Wanfang Data (ChinaInfo), etc.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信