Int Wound J. 2025 Nov;22(11):e70771. doi: 10.1111/iwj.70771.
ABSTRACT
This study aimed to gain clinician consensus on which signs/symptoms reported to be indicative of biofilm in chronic wounds are likely to be so. An international, two-round eDelphi process including wound care clinicians ran from December 2023 to February 2024. Participants rated 26 items on a 9-point Likert scale. Consensus to include: ≥ 70% of respondents rate an item 7-9, ≤ 15% rate it 1-3. Consensus to exclude: ≥ 70% of respondents rate an item 1-3, ≤ 15% rate it 7-9. Eleven items (visual indicators [a shiny, slimy, persistent layer, easily removed, returns quickly without frequent intervention]; failure to respond to antimicrobials; infection > 30 days duration; poor quality granulation tissue; stalled wound despite optimal management; persistent/prolonged inflammation; wound > 6 weeks duration; soft tissue deterioration despite antimicrobials/debridement; signs of local infection; tunnelling/undermining; presence of slough) achieved consensus to include status. To our knowledge, consensus work on this topic has not previously been performed on such a wide scale. When examined alongside similar work, clinical opinion on the matter lacks coherence. We hope that these findings will help direct us toward greater cohesiveness. The work supports a need for research to quantify the predictive abilities of signs and symptoms reported to be indicative of biofilm in chronic wounds.
PMID:41185925 | DOI:10.1111/iwj.70771
