Background: Treatment of chronic wounds is complex, particularly as a standard for the assessment and evaluation of quality of care is missing. Objectives: To develop indicators for quality of care in chronic wounds in general, and to evaluate the quality of care in leg ulcers in Hamburg, Germany, in particular. Methods: Twenty indicators were derived from a national Delphi expert consensus to compute a single index of quality of care. This index was applied in a cross-sectional study involving a large spectrum of care providers and leg ulcer patients in the community. Trained wound experts interviewed and examined the patients, who had to complete standardized questionnaires. Results: On average, 64% of the quality criteria were met in the consecutive sample of 502 patients with chronic leg ulcers of any origin; 75% of the patients were satisfied with their wound care. Predictors of quality of care are presented. Conclusions: This instrument is feasible, valid and ready for comparisons of patient groups, regions and care systems, and for optimization processes in wound care.

Keywords:
Chronic wounds, Quality indicators, Health-related quality of life, Questionnaire, Quality of care, Leg ulcer
1.
Posnett J, Gottrup F, Lundgren H, Saal G: The resource impact of wounds on health-care providers in Europe. J Wound Care 2009;18:154–161.
2.
Stock J, Szecseny J: Mit Qualitätsindikatoren arbeiten – Resümee und Perspektiven; in Stock J, Szecsenyi J (eds): Stichwort: Qualitätsindikatoren: Erste Erfahrungen in der Praxis. Bonn, KomPart, 2007, pp 301–316.
3.
Bernstein SJ, Hilborne LH: Clinical indicators: the road to quality care? Jt Comm J Qual Improv 1993;19:501–509.
4.
Mainz J: Quality measurement can improve the quality of care – when supervised by health professionals. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2008;117:321–322.
5.
Majeed A, Lester H, Bindman AB: Improving the quality of care with performance indicators. BMJ 2007;335:916–918.
6.
Schneider A, Broge B, Szecsenyi J: Müssen wir messen, um (noch) besser werden zu können? Die Bedeutung von Qualitätsindikatoren in strukturierten Behandlungsprogrammen und Qualitätsmanagement. Z Allgemeinmed 2003;79:547–552.
7.
ÄZQ (Ärztliches Zentrum für Qualität in der Medizin), Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften (AWMF): Deutsches Instrument zur methodischen Leitlinien-Bewertung (DELBI). Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich 2005/2006;99:468–519.
8.
Geraedts M, Selbmann HK, Ollenschläger G: Beurteilung der methodischen Qualität klinischer Messgrössen. Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich 2002;96:91–96.
9.
Mainz J: Developing evidence based clinical indicators: a state of the art methods primer. Int J Qual Health Care 2003;15(suppl 1):i5–i11.
10.
Campbell SM, Braspenning J, Hutchinson A, Marshall M: Improving the quality of health care: research methods used in developing and applying quality indicators in primary care. BMJ 2003;326:816–819.
11.
Rubin HR, Pronovost P, Diette GB: From a process of care to a measure: the development and testing of quality indicator. Int J Qual Health Care 2001;13:489–496.
12.
ÄZQ (Ärztliches Zentrum für Qualität in der Medizin): Beurteilung klinischer Messgrössen des Qualitätsmanagements, Qualitätskriterien und -indikatoren in der Gesundheitsversorgung. Konsensuspapier der Bundesärztekammer, der Kassenärztlichen Bundesvereinigung und der AWMF. Jena, Urban and Fischer, 2001.
13.
Kjaer ML, Sorensen LT, Karlsmark T, Mainz J, Gottrup F: Evaluation of the quality of venous leg ulcer care given in a multidisciplinary specialist centre. J Wound Care 2005;14:145–150.
14.
Gallenkemper G, Bulling BJ, Kahle B, Klüken N, Lehnert W, Rabe E, et al: Leitlinie zur Diagnostik und Therapie des Ulcus cruris venosum. Phlebologie 2004;33:166–185.
15.
Virani T, Registered Nurses Association of Ontario: Assessment and Management of Venous Leg Ulcer. Toronto, Registered Nurses Association of Ontario, 2004.
16.
Grace P: Guidelines for the Management of Leg Ulcers in Ireland. Dublin, Smith and Nephew, 2002.
17.
Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network: The care of patients with chronic leg ulcer: a national clinical guideline. Edinburgh, Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network, 1998.
18.
European Wound Management Association: Position Document: Wound Bed Preparation in Practice. London, MEP, 2004.
19.
Augustin M, Herberger K, Rustenbach SJ, Schäfer I, Zschocke I, Blome C: Quality of life evaluation in wounds: validation of the FLQA-w, a disease-specific instrument. Int Wound J 2010;7:493–501.
20.
Augustin M, Dieterle W, Zschocke I, Brill C, Trefzer D, Peschen M, et al: Development and validation of a disease-specific questionnaire on the quality of life of patients with chronic venous insufficiency. Vasa 1997;26:291–301.
21.
Greiner W, Weijnen T, Nieuwenhuizen M, Oppe S, Badia X, Busschbach J, et al: A single European currency for EQ-5D health states: results from a six-country study. Eur J Health Econ 2003;4:222–231.
22.
Herberger K, Rustenbach SJ, Haartje O, et al: Quality of life and satisfaction of patients with leg ulcers – results of a community-based study. Vasa 2011;40:131–138.
23.
Herberger K, Rustenbach SJ, Grams L, et al: Quality-of-care for leg ulcers in the metropolitan area of Hamburg – a community-based study. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2011, E-pub ahead of print.
© 2011 S. Karger AG, Basel
2011
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.