References

Management of biofilm.: Wounds International; 2016

Best practice statement: making day-to-day management of biofilm simple.: Wounds UK; 2017

Webb R. A chronic case of confusion. J Wound Care. 2017; 26:(8) https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2017.26.8.421

Malone M, Bjarnsholt T, McBain AJ The prevalence of biofilms in chronic wounds: a systematic review and meta-analysis of published data. J Wound Care. 2017; 26:(1)20-25 https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2017.26.1.20

Schultz G, Bjarnsholt T, James GA Consensus guidelines for the identification and treatment of biofilms in chronic nonhealing wounds. Wound Repair Regen. 2017; 25:(5)744-757 https://doi.org/10.1111/wrr.12590

Hurlow J, Blanz E, Gaddy JA. Clinical investigation of biofilm in non-healing wounds by high resolution microscopy techniques. J Wound Care. 2016; 25:S11-S22 https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2016.25.Sup9.S11

Haesler E, Swanson T, Ousey K, Carville K. Clinical indicators of wound infection and biofilm: reaching international consensus. J Wound Care. 2019; 28:s4-s12 https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2019.28.Sup3b.S4

Metcalf DG, Bowler PG. Clinician perceptions of wound biofilm. Int Wound J. 2016; 13:(5)717-725 https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12358

Hall-Stoodley L, Costerton JW, Stoodley P. Bacterial biofilms: from the Natural environment to infectious diseases. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2004; 2:(2)95-108 https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro821

Bowler PG. Antibiotic resistance and biofilm tolerance: a combined threat in the treatment of chronic infections. J Wound Care. 2018; 27:(5)273-277 https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2018.27.5.273

Davis SC, Ricotti C, Cazzaniga A Microscopic and physiologic evidence for biofilm-associated wound colonization in vivo. Wound Repair Regen. 2008; 16:(1)23-29 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-475X.2007.00303.x

Sun Y, Dowd SE, Smith E In vitro multispecies Lubbock chronic wound biofilm model. Wound Repair Regen. 2008; 16:(6)805-813 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-475X.2008.00434.x

Guest JF, Ayoub N, McIlwraith T Health economic burden that different wound types impose on the UK's National Health Service. Int Wound J. 2017; 14:(2)322-330 https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12603

Lindholm C, Searle R. Wound management for the 21st century: combining effectiveness and efficiency. Int Wound J. 2016; 13:5-15 https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12623

Audit findings highlight need for early intervention for diabetic foot ulcers. 2017. https://tinyurl.com/yyjapjgr (accessed 25 October 2019)

Siddiqui AR, Bernstein JM. Chronic wound infection: facts and controversies. Clin Dermatol. 2010; 28:(5)519-526 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clindermatol.2010.03.009

Howell-Jones RS, Wilson MJ, Hill KE A review of the microbiology, antibiotic usage and resistance in chronic skin wounds. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2005; 55:(2)143-149 https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkh513

Defying hard-to-heal wounds with an early antibiofilm intervention strategy: ‘wound hygiene’

02 July 2022
Volume 2022 · Issue 1

Abstract

Biofilm has been implicated as a barrier to wound healing and it is widely accepted that the majority of wounds not following a normal healing trajectory contain biofilm. Therefore, strategies that inform and engage clinicians to reduce biofilm and optimise the wound tissue environment to enable wound progression are of interest to wound care providers. In March 2019, an advisory board was convened where experts considered the barriers and opportunities to drive a broader adoption of a biofilm-based approach to wound care. Poor clarity and articulation of wound terminology were identified as likely barriers to clinical adoption of rigorous and proactive microbial decontamination that is supportive of wound healing advancement.

A transition to an intuitive term such as ‘wound hygiene’ was proposed to communicate a comprehensive wound decontamination plan with an associated message of expected habitual routine. ‘Wound hygiene’, is a relatable concept that supports meticulous wound practice that addresses barriers to wound healing, such as biofilm, while aligning with antimicrobial stewardship programmes.

A biofilm-based approach to wound care has already been defined.1,2 However, it has previously been questioned if we are waiting too long before starting biofilm-based wound care (BBWC).3 It is widely accepted that biofilm is present in the majority of hard-to-heal wounds and is a barrier to healing.4,5,6 While biofilm is not necessarily visible to the naked eye, the clinical signs and symptoms associated with its presence are broadly accepted.2,5 Delayed wound healing is considered a notable, recognised, indirect sign of biofilm presence.5,7,8

Biofilm is a complex polymicrobial community of microorganisms embedded in a self-produced hydrated extracellular matrix (ECM) that provides protection from antimicrobial agents and host defences.9 Biofilm can contain bacteria with genetic resistance to antibiotics. In addition, biofilm can display phenotypic tolerance to antibiotics as a consequence of being in the biofilm structure.10 Biofilm forms rapidly in wounds, with extensive regrowth demonstrated within 24–48 hours.11,12

Register now to continue reading

Thank you for visiting Wound Care Professional and reading some of our peer-reviewed resources for wound care professionals. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:

What's included

  • Access to clinical or professional articles

  • New content and clinical updates each month