踝关节骨折手术伤口的评估:骨合成Kolding (WOK)后伤口评分的发展和测试

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Niels Martin Jensen , Alice Ørts Hansen , Simon Thonsgaard , Ane Simony , Christian Cavallius , Rikke Serritslev Østergaard , Lars Bo Rottwitt , Charlotte Abrahamsen
{"title":"踝关节骨折手术伤口的评估:骨合成Kolding (WOK)后伤口评分的发展和测试","authors":"Niels Martin Jensen ,&nbsp;Alice Ørts Hansen ,&nbsp;Simon Thonsgaard ,&nbsp;Ane Simony ,&nbsp;Christian Cavallius ,&nbsp;Rikke Serritslev Østergaard ,&nbsp;Lars Bo Rottwitt ,&nbsp;Charlotte Abrahamsen","doi":"10.1016/j.injury.2025.112345","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Describing surgical wounds accurately poses challenges due to the diverse terminology used for complications. Existing evaluation methods do not cater specifically to surgical wounds from post-ankle fracture surgery with osteosynthesis. Given the unique anatomical challenges and treatment considerations (limited tissue coverage and blood supply as well as the surgical treatment with osteosynthesis), a targeted wound score is essential for ensuring consistent evaluation and high-quality care and thereby optimizing patient outcomes and satisfaction. The study aimed to develop a wound score specifically for evaluating surgical wounds following ankle fracture surgery.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>Development of the <em>Wound after Osteosynthesis Kolding</em> score (WOK) proceeded through three phases: 1) identifying WOK domains, 2) developing item and response options, and 3) pilot testing the WOK score.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Five domains were identified: <em>erythema, swelling, dehiscence, exudate</em> and <em>warmth</em>. Response options were derived from literature and clinical insights. Content validity was assessed with an S-CVI/Ave of 0.93 for nurses and 0.82 for orthopedic surgeons. Orthopedic surgeons perceived <em>erythema</em> and <em>warmth</em> as less relevant, while nurses considered all five domains to be fairly or very relevant. High agreement between scores was found, but varying kappa scores were observed when assessing intra-rater reliability. Inter-rater reliability was acceptable across all domains (κ = 0.44 to 1.00). <em>Warmth</em> was omitted from the final WOK score due to low content validity among orthopedic surgeons and poor inter-rater reliability. Additionally, assessing <em>warmth</em> in a clinical setting was challenging because ankle brace stabilization affects overall skin humidity and warmth.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The Wound after Osteosynthesis Kolding score (WOK) has proven to be a content-valid and reliable tool for assessing minor complications in surgical wounds following ankle fracture surgery.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54978,"journal":{"name":"Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured","volume":"56 6","pages":"Article 112345"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of ankle fracture surgical wounds: the development and testing of the Wound after Osteosynthesis Kolding (WOK) score\",\"authors\":\"Niels Martin Jensen ,&nbsp;Alice Ørts Hansen ,&nbsp;Simon Thonsgaard ,&nbsp;Ane Simony ,&nbsp;Christian Cavallius ,&nbsp;Rikke Serritslev Østergaard ,&nbsp;Lars Bo Rottwitt ,&nbsp;Charlotte Abrahamsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.injury.2025.112345\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Describing surgical wounds accurately poses challenges due to the diverse terminology used for complications. Existing evaluation methods do not cater specifically to surgical wounds from post-ankle fracture surgery with osteosynthesis. Given the unique anatomical challenges and treatment considerations (limited tissue coverage and blood supply as well as the surgical treatment with osteosynthesis), a targeted wound score is essential for ensuring consistent evaluation and high-quality care and thereby optimizing patient outcomes and satisfaction. The study aimed to develop a wound score specifically for evaluating surgical wounds following ankle fracture surgery.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>Development of the <em>Wound after Osteosynthesis Kolding</em> score (WOK) proceeded through three phases: 1) identifying WOK domains, 2) developing item and response options, and 3) pilot testing the WOK score.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Five domains were identified: <em>erythema, swelling, dehiscence, exudate</em> and <em>warmth</em>. Response options were derived from literature and clinical insights. Content validity was assessed with an S-CVI/Ave of 0.93 for nurses and 0.82 for orthopedic surgeons. Orthopedic surgeons perceived <em>erythema</em> and <em>warmth</em> as less relevant, while nurses considered all five domains to be fairly or very relevant. High agreement between scores was found, but varying kappa scores were observed when assessing intra-rater reliability. Inter-rater reliability was acceptable across all domains (κ = 0.44 to 1.00). <em>Warmth</em> was omitted from the final WOK score due to low content validity among orthopedic surgeons and poor inter-rater reliability. Additionally, assessing <em>warmth</em> in a clinical setting was challenging because ankle brace stabilization affects overall skin humidity and warmth.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The Wound after Osteosynthesis Kolding score (WOK) has proven to be a content-valid and reliable tool for assessing minor complications in surgical wounds following ankle fracture surgery.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54978,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured\",\"volume\":\"56 6\",\"pages\":\"Article 112345\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0020138325002050\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0020138325002050","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

由于并发症使用的术语不同,准确描述手术伤口提出了挑战。现有的评估方法不能专门针对踝关节骨折后植骨手术的外科伤口。考虑到独特的解剖挑战和治疗考虑(有限的组织覆盖和血液供应以及骨合成手术治疗),有针对性的伤口评分对于确保一致的评估和高质量的护理至关重要,从而优化患者的结果和满意度。本研究旨在开发一种专门用于评估踝关节骨折手术后外科伤口的伤口评分。方法创面成骨后Kolding评分(WOK)的发展经历了三个阶段:1)确定WOK结构域,2)制定项目和反应选项,3)试点测试WOK评分。结果鉴定出红斑、肿胀、裂开、渗出和发热五个领域。反应方案来源于文献和临床见解。内容效度评估护士的S-CVI/Ave为0.93,骨科医生为0.82。骨科医生认为红斑和体温不太相关,而护士认为这五个领域都相当或非常相关。评分之间的一致性很高,但在评估评分者内部可靠性时观察到不同的kappa评分。在所有领域,评分间信度均可接受(κ = 0.44至1.00)。由于骨科医生的内容效度较低,且评分者间信度较差,因此最终的WOK评分中省略了温情。此外,在临床环境中评估温度是具有挑战性的,因为踝关节支架的稳定性会影响整体皮肤的湿度和温度。结论骨融合术后伤口Kolding评分(WOK)已被证明是评估踝关节骨折术后手术伤口轻微并发症的有效和可靠的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessment of ankle fracture surgical wounds: the development and testing of the Wound after Osteosynthesis Kolding (WOK) score

Introduction

Describing surgical wounds accurately poses challenges due to the diverse terminology used for complications. Existing evaluation methods do not cater specifically to surgical wounds from post-ankle fracture surgery with osteosynthesis. Given the unique anatomical challenges and treatment considerations (limited tissue coverage and blood supply as well as the surgical treatment with osteosynthesis), a targeted wound score is essential for ensuring consistent evaluation and high-quality care and thereby optimizing patient outcomes and satisfaction. The study aimed to develop a wound score specifically for evaluating surgical wounds following ankle fracture surgery.

Method

Development of the Wound after Osteosynthesis Kolding score (WOK) proceeded through three phases: 1) identifying WOK domains, 2) developing item and response options, and 3) pilot testing the WOK score.

Results

Five domains were identified: erythema, swelling, dehiscence, exudate and warmth. Response options were derived from literature and clinical insights. Content validity was assessed with an S-CVI/Ave of 0.93 for nurses and 0.82 for orthopedic surgeons. Orthopedic surgeons perceived erythema and warmth as less relevant, while nurses considered all five domains to be fairly or very relevant. High agreement between scores was found, but varying kappa scores were observed when assessing intra-rater reliability. Inter-rater reliability was acceptable across all domains (κ = 0.44 to 1.00). Warmth was omitted from the final WOK score due to low content validity among orthopedic surgeons and poor inter-rater reliability. Additionally, assessing warmth in a clinical setting was challenging because ankle brace stabilization affects overall skin humidity and warmth.

Conclusions

The Wound after Osteosynthesis Kolding score (WOK) has proven to be a content-valid and reliable tool for assessing minor complications in surgical wounds following ankle fracture surgery.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
8.00%
发文量
699
审稿时长
96 days
期刊介绍: Injury was founded in 1969 and is an international journal dealing with all aspects of trauma care and accident surgery. Our primary aim is to facilitate the exchange of ideas, techniques and information among all members of the trauma team.
×
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