急性和慢性伤口感染评估工具:范围审查。

Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P Pub Date : 2025-05-02 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1590/1980-220X-REEUSP-2024-0392en
Daniella Cristina Julio Lima, Graciele Oroski Paes
{"title":"急性和慢性伤口感染评估工具:范围审查。","authors":"Daniella Cristina Julio Lima, Graciele Oroski Paes","doi":"10.1590/1980-220X-REEUSP-2024-0392en","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To map the tools available in the literature for assessing wound infection.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This is a scoping review conducted from the Joana Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis, in the databases of the Virtual Health Library, PubMed, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and the academic literature repository, Google Scholar. The research question was developed based on the acronym PCC (Population/Concept/Context), resulting in the following formulation: \"Which tools available in the literature assess wound infections?\"</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis included 32 wound infection assessment tools. Of these, 26 using clinical signs and symptoms of infection distributed across scales, checklists, classification systems, and completion forms were identified. In addition to these, 5 electronic devices and 01 software were identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The diversity of instruments highlights the complexity of wound infection management, emphasizing the need to discuss their applicability, benefits, and limitations to select the best evidence-based instrument.</p>","PeriodicalId":94195,"journal":{"name":"Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P","volume":"59 ","pages":"e20240392"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12063538/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Infection assessment tools for acute and chronic wounds: a scoping review.\",\"authors\":\"Daniella Cristina Julio Lima, Graciele Oroski Paes\",\"doi\":\"10.1590/1980-220X-REEUSP-2024-0392en\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To map the tools available in the literature for assessing wound infection.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This is a scoping review conducted from the Joana Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis, in the databases of the Virtual Health Library, PubMed, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and the academic literature repository, Google Scholar. The research question was developed based on the acronym PCC (Population/Concept/Context), resulting in the following formulation: \\\"Which tools available in the literature assess wound infections?\\\"</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis included 32 wound infection assessment tools. Of these, 26 using clinical signs and symptoms of infection distributed across scales, checklists, classification systems, and completion forms were identified. In addition to these, 5 electronic devices and 01 software were identified.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The diversity of instruments highlights the complexity of wound infection management, emphasizing the need to discuss their applicability, benefits, and limitations to select the best evidence-based instrument.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94195,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P\",\"volume\":\"59 \",\"pages\":\"e20240392\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12063538/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-220X-REEUSP-2024-0392en\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-220X-REEUSP-2024-0392en","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:对文献中可用的评估伤口感染的工具进行分析。方法:这是从Joana Briggs研究所证据合成手册,在虚拟健康图书馆,PubMed, Scopus,护理和相关健康文献累积索引和学术文献储存库谷歌Scholar的数据库中进行的范围审查。研究问题是基于首字母缩略词PCC(人口/概念/背景)开发的,得出以下公式:“文献中哪些工具可用来评估伤口感染?”结果:分析了32种伤口感染评估工具。其中,确定了26例使用临床体征和感染症状的病例,这些病例分布在量表、检查表、分类系统和填写表格中。此外,还鉴定了5个电子设备和01个软件。结论:器械的多样性凸显了伤口感染管理的复杂性,强调需要讨论其适用性,益处和局限性,以选择最佳的循证器械。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Infection assessment tools for acute and chronic wounds: a scoping review.

Objective: To map the tools available in the literature for assessing wound infection.

Method: This is a scoping review conducted from the Joana Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis, in the databases of the Virtual Health Library, PubMed, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and the academic literature repository, Google Scholar. The research question was developed based on the acronym PCC (Population/Concept/Context), resulting in the following formulation: "Which tools available in the literature assess wound infections?"

Results: The analysis included 32 wound infection assessment tools. Of these, 26 using clinical signs and symptoms of infection distributed across scales, checklists, classification systems, and completion forms were identified. In addition to these, 5 electronic devices and 01 software were identified.

Conclusion: The diversity of instruments highlights the complexity of wound infection management, emphasizing the need to discuss their applicability, benefits, and limitations to select the best evidence-based instrument.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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