Wound Emergencies: The Importance of Assessment, Documentation, and Early Treatment Using a Wound Electronic Medical Record

Abstract

Chronic wounds such as diabetic foot ulcers, venous ulcers, and pressure ulcers are a major source of morbidity and mortality. To describe wound characteristics associated with a wound emergency, the Wound Electronic Medical Records (WEMR) of 200 consecutive admissions (139 patients, average number of admissions 1.4) to a dedicated inpatient wound healing unit over a period of 5 months were retrospectively reviewed.

Patient mean age was 62 ± 16 years, 59% were men, 27% had a foot ulcer and diabetes mellitus, and 29% had venous ulcers. Presenting signs and symptoms included wound pain, cellulitis, nonpurulent drainage, and undermining, but few presented with classic local clinical signs of infection. Treatment consisted of sharp debridement with deep tissue culture and pathology from the wound base and/or systemic antibiotics. Twenty-percent (20%) of patients had pathology-confirmed and 38% had pathology- or radiology-confirmed osteomyelitis on admission, supporting that new or increasing wound pain, cellulitis, and/or nonpurulent drainage or presence of significant undermining may be indicative of an invasive infection and that patients presenting with these signs and symptoms require an immediate treatment plan and consideration of hospital admission. Use of an objective documentation system such as the WEMR may help alert clinicians to subtle wound changes that require aggressive treatment; thereby, avoiding emergency room visits and hospital admissions. Future research is needed utilizing the WEMR across multiple medical centers to further define criteria for a chronic wound emergency. This study was funded through a National Institutes of Health/National Library of Medicine grant RO1LM008443.

Dr. Golinko is a surgical resident, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY. Dr. Clark is an Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA. Mr. Rennert is a medical student, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio. Dr. Flattau is an Assistant Professor, Department of Family and Social Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY. Dr. Boulton is a Professor, Division of Endocrinology, University of Miami School of Medicine, Miami, FL, and University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. Dr. Brem is Associate Professor of Surgery and Division Chief, Division of Wound Healing and Regenerative Medicine, Helen & Martin Kimmel Wound Center, Department of Surgery, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY.

Please address correspondence to: Harold Brem, MD, FACS, Helen & Martin Kimmel Wound Center, Department of Surgery, New York University School of Medicine, 301 East 17th Street, New York, NY 10003; email: Harold.brem@nyumc.org.

     Chronic wounds are defined by their multiple physiologic impairments to healing,¹ including inadequate angiogenesis,² impaired enervation,³ and impaired cellular migration.⁴ In 2005, the annual cost of caring for patients with these wounds exceeded $20 billion.5

     It is estimated that four million patients with diseases of the skin and subcutaneous tissue (ICD-9s 680 through 709.0) visit emergency departments across the country each year.6 Based on data from the Healthcare Utilization Project (HCUP) website (www.hcupnet.ahrq.gov),⁷ a minimum estimated 938,000 patients per year are admitted to the hospital with a diagnosis of a chronic wound (ICD-9 codes 707.0 and 707.1).

     The three most common types of chronic wounds are diabetic foot ulcers, venous ulcers, and pressure ulcers.^8-10 According to several population-based studies in Europe¹¹ and the US,¹² individuals with type 1 diabetes have a 25% lifetime risk of developing a foot ulcer¹³; presence of an ulcer may increase the risk of lower extremity amputation almost six-fold.¹⁴ The 5-year survival rate of patients with diabetes is approximately 31% after major amputation.¹⁵ Venous stasis ulcers and their infectious complications have not been well quantified but often have been found to result in decreased quality of life,¹⁰ decreased mobility, and increased pain.⁹

     According to the most recent HCUP data, in 2006 more than 500,000 patients admitted to hospitals had a pressure ulcer, representing an 80% increase since 1993. The most common associated diagnosis was septicemia.¹⁰ Depending on the setting, pressure ulcer prevalence ranges from approximately 18%16 to 27%.17 The mortality rate is estimated at 0.4%; pressure ulcers were identified as an underlying cause in 18.1% of these deaths.¹⁸

     For this reason, the authors hypothesize that any patient presenting with systemic inflammation, multi-organ system failure, or sepsis should be examined for the presence of a chronic wound, which is often an under-diagnosed source of invasive infection. Systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), which can occur in the presence or absence of infection, is characterized by at least two of the following symptoms: temperature >100.9˚F or <96.8˚F, elevated heart rate (>90 bpm), respiratory rate 20, PCO2 <32 mm Hg, or white blood cell count >12,000 or <4,000 cells/µl. A “septic” patient also may have altered mental status, ileus, hyperglycemia in the absence of diabetes, elevated C-reactive protein, renal dysfunction (oliguria or increase >0.5 mg/dL in creatinine), coagulopathy (international normalized ratio [INR] >1.5) or partial thromboplastin time [PTT] > 60 seconds, thrombocytopenia, hyperbilirubinemia, and hemodynamic dysfunction.¹⁹ A full skin exam should be part of any evaluation for a patient with SIRS or signs of sepsis.

     The management of patients with chronic wounds requires longitudinal, coordinated outpatient care. However, as occurs in many chronic conditions, patients with nonhealing wounds may present with acute complications or exacerbations. When patients present with acute complaints, the treating physician must evaluate whether the presentation merits an urgent treatment plan or routine outpatient follow-up. Even in the absence of systemic inflammation, a chronic wound may be associated with pain, cellulitis, drainage, or significant undermining that indicates invasive soft tissue infection, often involving bone.

     A retrospective study was conducted to elucidate the local signs and symptoms as recorded in the Wound Electronic Medical Record (WEMR) of wounds from patients who required urgent treatment to help determine what constitutes a wound emergency.

Methods

     Over 5 months (July to November 2006), the records of 200 consecutive admissions to a dedicated inpatient wound healing service of a large tertiary care hospital were reviewed (outpatient visits were not included in this analysis). All patients had pain, cellulitis, nonpurulent drainage, and/or undermining associated with their wound, requiring immediate inpatient medical attention.

     Standard of care. Once a patient is admitted to the wound healing inpatient unit, an interdisciplinary team of nurses, a surgeon, a primary care physician, a social worker, and physician assistants implements published protocols and guidelines.20-26 All admitted patients typically receive intravenous antibiotics and/or operative debridement of the wound.

     The wounds are examined, photographed, measured, and documented in the WEMR database. The WEMR displays on a single printed sheet or computer screen the wound measurements (ie, length, width, depth, and area graphed over time), as well as digital photographs of the wound, vascular testing results (ie, noninvasive flow studies [NIFS]), bacterial cultures, laboratory values, and radiology and pathology reports, in addition to notations regarding amount of drainage, undermining, and presence or absence of cellulitis and pain. Providers can view these data in a single comprehensive Wound Report Form that displays a graph of healing rate, providing an objective framework for each treatment decision (see Figure 1).

     Data collection. Medical records, wound data, and wound photographs of patients with a lower extremity ulcer and diabetes, venous ulcer, or pressure ulcer were selected for review.

     Descriptive data were collected from the WEMR, the hospital medical record, and vascular laboratory reports. Patients were classified as having peripheral arterial disease if it was recorded that their ankle-brachial index (ABI) was <0.9. Osteomyelitis data were recorded as the presence of a positive radiology report (either bone scan or magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) or a positive pathology report. After the patients were identified, the data were reviewed by all of the authors for completeness. Data were entered into Microsoft Excel (Redmond, WA); means and proportions were calculated using this software.

     All patient data were reviewed under IRB-approved protocol.

Results

     The 200 admissions reviewed comprised 139 patients, most commonly with venous ulcers and foot ulcers in the presence of diabetes mellitus and managed with surgical debridement and/or treatment with systemic antibiotics (see Table 1). Approximately one third of all patients had peripheral arterial disease and evidence of osteomyelitis. Of the 139 patients, 109 (78%) had at least one admission originating in the emergency department; for 80 (74%), this was the first presentation. Each patient had an average of 1.4 ± 0.8 admissions during the study period. Of the 200 consecutive admissions, 134 (67%) originated in the emergency department. Based on a review of all the records, three patients with the most commonly encountered types of chronic wounds — one each with a lower extremity ulcer and diabetes, a venous ulcer, and a pressure ulcer — are described.

Case Reports

     All case study patients had at least one of the following— increasing wound drainage, increasing pain, persistent or non-resolving cellulitis, and/or significant undermining — and were managed based on presenting characteristics as summarized in Table 2.

     Case 1: Recurrent pain from a lower extremity ulcer in a patient with diabetes. Mr. U, an 89-year-old man with a medical history that included diabetes, hypertension, myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, chronic renal insufficiency, cerebrovascular accident, and asthma, presented in the clinic with a tender, painful ulcer over the area of the Achilles tendon. This was Mr. U’s only symptom; he had stopped walking approximately 6 months before this presentation. The initial appearance of his wound before emergent presentation is shown in Figure 2a.

     Mr. U’s wound subsequently was debrided but he returned to the clinic 4 weeks later complaining of increasing pain. No drainage or cellulitis was noted. Because of the severity of his pain, he was admitted the same day (see Figure 2b). At the time of admission, Mr. U’s vital signs were temperature 100° F, respiratory rate 20, pulse 73 bpm, and blood pressure 176/80 mm Hg. His serum glucose was 98 mg/dL, blood urea nitrogen 19 mg/dL, serum creatinine 1.2 mg/dL, and white blood cell count 5,400 /µL. A bone scan revealed osteomyelitis of his right heel. His ABIs were within normal limits. Although the wound initially appeared to be 3 cm in diameter over the Achilles tendon, operative debridement revealed 12 cm of undermining superiorly (see Figure 2c). The pathology report noted tendon and skeletal muscle with chronic inflammation and degenerative changes. Sterile wound cultures of the tendon grew Escherichia coli resistant to fluoroquinolones and tobramycin. After extensive debridement, resection of a portion of the Achilles tendon, bilayered cellular therapy^27,28 with human living keratinocytes and fibroblasts, and 6 weeks of IV antibiotics for treatment of osteomyelitis, Mr. U’s pain resolved and the wound healed (see Figure 2d). Most importantly, Mr. U’s mental status dramatically improved; after 6 months of being bed-bound and not able to walk, he was ambulatory.

     Case 2: Drainage and cellulitis in a venous stasis ulcer. Ms. W, a 53-year-old woman with a history of hepatitis C cirrhosis, presented to the emergency room with increased drainage and chronic cellulitis from multiple nonhealing venous ulcers. Oral antibiotics had been administered in her nursing home without improvement. One of these ulcers on her left calf is shown at time of presentation (see Figure 3). On admission, her vital signs included temperature 96.8° F, respiratory rate 20, pulse 64 bpm, and blood pressure 150/90 mm Hg. Her serum glucose was 95 mg/dL, blood urea nitrogen 8.0 mg/dL, and serum creatinine 0.5mg/dL. Her white blood cell count was 6,300 cells/µL. Clear, nonpurulent drainage and mild cellulitis were noted on physical exam. Pathology from operative debridement showed granulation tissue with focal areas of acute inflammation and necrosis. Atrophic skeletal muscle and fibrosis also were reported. Deep sterile cultures of the muscle and tendon grew Acinetobacter baumannii resistant to multiple antibiotics including imipenem, amikacin, ampicillin/sulbactam, third generation cephalosporins, and fluoroquinolones. Previous cultures of this area had grown vancomycin-resistant enterococci, and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Over the next 6 months, Ms. W required multiple debridements with application of human living keratinocytes and fibroblasts and antibiotics to control her recurrent local infections. In that time, her wound area decreased from 22.2 cm² to 9.1 cm².

     Case 3: Undermining and drainage in a pressure ulcer. Mr. V, a 63-year-old bed-bound man with a history of multiple sclerosis and ulcerative colitis, presented to the emergency room with increased nonpurulent drainage from a Stage IV sacral pressure ulcer (see Figure 4). He denied having pain or fever. On admission, his vital signs were temperature 99.3° F, respiratory rate 20, pulse 78 bpm, and blood pressure 110/70 mm Hg. His admission serum laboratory values were glucose 101 mg/dL, blood urea nitrogen 13.0 mg/dL, serum creatinine of 1.0 mg/dL, and white blood cell count of 9,100 cells/µL. On examination, extensive undermining was present between 3 and 6 o’clock, and operative debridement of necrotic tissue extended into the bone. Pathology revealed necrotic soft tissue and focal acute osteomyelitis. After the necrotic tissue was removed, deep sterile tissue cultures of sacral bone were taken and grew Enterococcus faecalis. After 2 months of treatment including local wound care and operative debridement, the wound area decreased from 30.1 cm² to 21.2 cm².

Discussion

     Although the literature describing acute wound emergencies (eg, necrotizing fasciitis or gangrene) is extensive and the number of patients with chronic wounds visiting emergency rooms is high, few reports or data define a chronic wound emergency — ie, the clinical characteristics that merit urgent inpatient treatment. In this report, the authors reviewed the records of 200 admissions, the majority of which (74%) presented to their service for the first time not through the clinic but through the emergency room. The 139 unique patients admitted in the study period were for the most part older (mean age 62 years), male, and presented with a diabetic foot ulcer or venous ulcer. At initial admission work-up, a 32% prevalence of peripheral arterial disease was noted and one-in-five patients presented from the community with pathology-confirmed osteomyelitis.

     The purpose of this initial report was to draw attention to the clinical characteristics that may constitute a chronic wound emergency. The fact that the majority of first-time patients present through the emergency room merits further quantitative study with an objective tool such as the WEMR to rigorously define the characteristics of chronic wounds requiring urgent treatment. Moreover, a dedicated electronic record supports comprehensive and consistent care to all patients presenting with wounds in the emergency room and thereby may help eliminate disparities in care. In the authors’ experience working in the inner city, patients have access to interdisciplinary services and care regardless of insurance or socioeconomic status because the WEMR objectifies care based on why the wound is not healing — eg, cellulitis, drainage, or pain. Once alerted from the WEMR, the wound clinician then can alter the treatment course accordingly.

     From the case reports selected, the authors observed that although these wounds did not have gangrene or purulence on admission exams, wound cultures grew antibiotic-resistant organisms and were associated with histological signs of necrosis, ulceration, or osteomyelitis. Because diabetes impairs the local inflammatory response secondary to neuropathy,³ all classic signs of infection may not be present. Moreover, the authors hypothesize that if these warning signs of impending sepsis or SIRS are missed, patients may be undertreated for conditions such as invasive soft tissue infection or osteomyelitis and may subsequently present with a larger wound and a resistant organism if partially treated and inadequately debrided. In these cases, the wound may turn gangrenous or lead to necrotizing fasciitis, sepsis, or amputation; therefore, deep debridement is indicated when the patient presents.

     Infection. A nonhealing wound, as measured by change in area, is often a sign of occult infection. Use of an informatics system such as the WEMR in the emergency room or clinic setting would allow clinicians to determine if the wound is not healing as compared to previous visits.

     Patients with chronic wounds may not present with classic signs of soft tissue infection, such as redness, warmth, swelling, and pain, particularly if they have impaired immune response from aging³⁰ or impaired local vasodilatation linked to neuropathy.³¹ Hence, absence of these classic signs does not rule out a wound infection; the clinician should be aware of the atypical signs of a chronic wound infection and devise a treatment plan (see Table 2). In any person with diabetes and wound pain, even a small ulcer may harbor an infection. Increased drainage in a chronic wound is often a sign of persistent infection.²¹ Although the drainage may not be purulent, discoloration or an increase in drainage may be a sign of persistent infection that requires treatment.

     Pain. The presence of pain is an abnormal finding that merits observation and usually intervention. Mr. U (Case 1) complained only of pain, but this was an indication of a severe soft tissue infection and osteomyelitis (see Figure 2c). Pain should be evaluated not only in the wound itself, but also in normal-appearing adjacent areas.

     Undermining. Undermining is defined as loss of subcutaneous tissue beyond the visible epidermal boundaries of the wound; it often is missed on initial exam. Undermining reflects significant infection and requires sharp debridement. A sterile swab can be used to gently probe the wound for exposed bone and to evaluate for undermining of the wound. In the study population, more than one third of the patients presented with some evidence of osteomyelitis and one out of five was confirmed by surgical pathology. The Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services (CMS) guidelines (Federal Tag F314) mandate assessment of undermining.³² A similar evaluation is useful in the clinic or emergency department setting. Even when skin surrounding the wound appears healthy, it may conceal infected or necrotic tissue underneath. Any Stage IV pressure ulcer or wound that probes to bone should raise suspicion for osteomyelitis. Biopsy of the tissue left behind after debridement can verify presence or absence of osteomyelitis and guide subsequent treatment.

     In summary, the authors recommend that clinicians:

     1. Evaluate the skin in all patients with signs of sepsis¹⁹;

     2. Obtain deep cultures upon presentation and initiate systemic antibiotics when patients present with signs or symptoms suggestive of acute or worsening infection;

     3. Debride all nonischemic wound infections, best performed by sharp excision of the superficial infected fibrinous and nonviable tissue. Noninfected tissue from the wound base, judged after debridement to be viable, should be sent to microbiology and pathology for analysis;

     4. When persons with chronic wounds present with signs and symptoms such as new or increasing pain, cellulitis, nonpurulent drainage, or significant undermining, they should be evaluated for hospital admission and a treatment plan should be initiated. Table 2 summarizes the clinical characteristics of a chronic wound emergency.

Conclusion

     After evaluating the results of this study analyzing the descriptions of wounds in patients presenting emergently for treatment, the authors hypothesize that the implementation of an objective electronic wound-specific database such as the WEMR will be helpful in decreasing chronic wound emergencies because even a subtle change in wound area can be documented at every outpatient visit. Moreover, the clinician would have all available clinical information in one location — ie, laboratory values, pathology, and culture results — to readily ascertain why the wound is not healing and subsequently intervene. Additional research will aim to utilize the WEMR to conduct a multicenter study to further define a wound emergency.

1. Attinger CE, Janis JE, Steinberg J, Schwartz J, Al-Attar A, Couch K. Clinical approach to wounds: debridement and wound bed preparation including the use of dressings and wound-healing adjuvants. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;117:72S–109S.

2. Cho CH, Sung HK, Kim KT, et al. COMP-angiopoietin-1 promotes wound healing through enhanced angiogenesis, lymphangiogenesis, and blood flow in a diabetic mouse model. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2006;103:4946–4951.

3. Gibran NS, Jang YC, Isik FF, et al. Diminished neuropeptide levels contribute to the impaired cutaneous healing response associated with diabetes mellitus. J Surg Res. 2002;108:122–128.

4. Brem H, Stojadinovic O, Diegelmann RF, et al. Molecular markers in patients with chronic wounds to guide surgical debridement. Mol Med. 2007;13:30–39.

5. Medicare Coverage Advisory Committee. In; 2005 March 29, 2005; Baltimore, Maryland: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; 2005.

6. McCaig LF, Nawar EW. National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 2004 emergency department summary. Adv Data. 2006;23(372):1–29.

7. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. Available at: www.hcupnet.ahrq.gov. Accessed April 25, 2009.

8. Lavery LA, Armstrong DG, Wunderlich RP, et al. Risk factors for foot infections in individuals with diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2006;29:1288–1293.

9. Wipke-Tevis DD, Rantz MJ, Mehr DR, Popejoy L, et al. Prevalence, incidence, management, and predictors of venous ulcers in the long-term care population using the MDS. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2000;13(5):218–224.

10. Russo CA, Steiner C, Spector W. Hospitalizations Related to Pressure Ulcers, 2006. HCUPStatistical Brief #64. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Available at: www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb64.pdf. Accessed May 1, 2009.

11. International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot. Epidemiology of diabetic foot infections in a population-based cohort. Paper presented at the International Consensus on the Diabetic Foot. Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands. May 22–24, 2003.

12. Lavery LA, Armstrong DG, Wunderlich RP, Tredwell J, Boulton AJ. Diabetic foot syndrome: evaluating the prevalence and incidence of foot pathology in Mexican Americans and non-Hispanic whites from a diabetes management cohort. Diabetes Care. 2003;26:1435–1438.

13. Singh N, Armstrong DG, Lipsky BA. Preventing foot ulcers in patients with diabetes. JAMA. 2005;293:217–228.

14. Davis WA, Norman PE, Bruce DG, Davis TM. Predictors, consequences and costs of diabetes-related lower extremity amputation complicating type 2 diabetes: the Fremantle Diabetes Study. Diabetologia. 2006;49:2634–2641.

15. Faglia E, Clerici G, Clerissi J, et al. Early and five-year amputation and survival rate of diabetic patients with critical limb ischemia: data of a cohortstudy of 564 patients. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2006;32:484–490.

16. Vanderwee K, Clark M, Dealey C, Gunningberg L, Defloor T. Pressure ulcer prevalence in Europe: a pilot study. J Eval Clin Pract. 2007;13:227–235.

17. Capon A, Pavoni N, Mastromattei A, Di Lallo D. Pressure ulcer risk in long-term units: prevalence and associated factors. J Advanced Nurs. 2007;58:263–272.

18. Redelings MD, Lee NE, Sorvillo F. Pressure ulcers: more lethal than we thought? Advances Skin Wound Care. 2005;18:367–372.

19. Levy MM, Fink MP, Marshall JC, et al. 2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS International Sepsis Definitions Conference. Crit Care Med. 2003;31:1250–1256.

20. Hopf HW, Ueno C, Aslam R, et al. Guidelines for the treatment of arterial insufficiency ulcers. Wound Repair Regen. 2006;14:693–710.

21. Brem H, Jacobs T, Vileikyte L, et al. Wound-healing protocols for diabetic foot and pressure ulcers. Surg Technol Int. 2003;11:85–92.

22. Brem H, Sheehan P, Rosenberg HJ, Schneider JS, Boulton AJ. Evidence-based protocol for diabetic foot ulcers. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;117:193S–209S; discussion 10S–11S.

23. Brem H, Kirsner RS, Falanga V. Protocol for the successful treatment of venous ulcers. Am J Surg. 2004;188:1–8.

24. Robson MC, Cooper DM, Aslam R, et al. Guidelines for the treatment of venous ulcers. Wound Repair Regen. 2006;14:649–662.

25. Steed DL, Attinger C, Colaizzi T, et al. Guidelines for the treatment of diabetic ulcers. Wound Repair Regen. 2006;14:680–692.

26. Whitney J, Phillips L, Aslam R, et al. Guidelines for the treatment of pressure ulcers. Wound Repair Regen. 2006;14:663–679.

27. Brem H, Young J, Tomic-Canic M, Isaacs C, Ehrlich HP. Clinical efficacy and mechanism of bilayered living human skin equivalent (HSE) in treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. Surg Technol Int. 2003;11:23–31.

28. Veves A, Falanga V, Armstrong DG, Sabolinski ML. Graftskin, a human skin equivalent, is effective in the management of noninfected neuropathic diabetic foot ulcers: a prospective randomized multicenter clinical trial. Diabetes Care. 2001;24:290–295.

29. De Martinis M, Modesti M, Ginaldi L. Phenotypic and functional changes of circulating monocytes and polymorphonuclear leucocytes from eld.erly persons. Immunol Cell Biol. 2004;82:415–420

30. Veves A, Akbari CM, Primavera J, et al. Endothelial dysfunction and the expression of endothelial nitric oxide synthetase in diabetic neuropathy, vascular disease, and foot ulceration. Diabetes. 1998;47:457–463.

31. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services Manual System. State Operations Provider Certification. [Pub.100-07] 2006. Available at: www.cms.hhs.gov/manuals/Downloads/som107ap_pp_guidelines_ltcf.pdf. Accessed January 20, 2007.