Keywords
Wound Care Innovation
Circular Research Model
Multidisciplinary Collaboration
How to Cite
Abstract
Between 2014 and 2019, the prevalence of chronic wounds among Medicare beneficiaries rose from 14.5% to 16.4%, with a particularly sharp increase among younger individuals with disabilities. Despite this rise, total treatment costs declined from $29.7 billion to $22.5 billion, suggesting a shift toward more decentralized care models. Notably, spending increased for venous ulcer treatment and durable medical equipment, indicating greater use of advanced dressings and home-based technologies. These changes reflect an evolving wound care landscape marked by growing reliance on outpatient and home care services. However, they also underscore persistent disparities in access to quality care, especially for vulnerable populations. At the same time, wound care research continues to be limited by the fragmentation and inaccessibility of scientific knowledge. The dominance of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) within the traditional evidence hierarchy fails to fully account for the complexity and heterogeneity of wound care contexts. To address these limitations, a circular model of research is proposed—one that integrates RCTs, observational studies, and clinical experiences. This inclusive approach recognizes the value of diverse sources of evidence and promotes the development of scalable and context-sensitive solutions. Ultimately, advancing wound care requires not only technological innovation but also open, collaborative, and patient-centered research capable of informing practice across all settings.
References
1. Carter MJ, DaVanzo J, Haught R, Nusgart M, Cartwright D, Fife CE. Chronic wound prevalence and the associated cost of treatment in Medicare beneficiaries: changes between 2014 and 2019. J Med Econ. 2023;26(1):894–901. https://doi.org/10.1080/13696998.2023.2232256
2. Gray TA, Dumville JC, Christie J, Cullum NA. Rapid research and implementation priority setting for wound care uncertainties. PLoS One. 2017;12(12):e0188958. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0188958
3. Cutting KF, White RJ, Legerstee R. Evidence and practical wound care – an all-inclusive approach. Wound Med. 2017;16:40–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wndm.2017.01.005
4. Kuan YT, Wang TF, Guo CY, Tang FI, Hou IC. Wound care knowledge, attitudes, and practices and mobile health technology use in the home environment: cross-sectional survey of social network users. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020;8(3):e15678. https://doi.org/10.2196/15678
5. Ibbetson H, Botros M, Orsted H, et al. Creating a community of practice for wound care leadership. Wound Care Can. 2021;19(1):84–88.
6. Lindsay E, Renyi R, Wilkie P, et al. Patient-centred care: a call to action for wound management. J Wound Care. 2017;26(11):662–677. https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2017.26.11.662
7. Beeckman D, Cooper M, Greenstein E, et al. The role community-based healthcare providers play in managing hard-to-heal wounds. Int Wound J. 2024;21(1):e14402. https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.14402
Authors retain copyright in their work and do not transfer copyright to the Journal or Publisher.
Upon acceptance and publication, authors grant iEditore a non-exclusive right of first publication and a non-exclusive right to publish, reproduce, distribute, preserve, register, index, promote, communicate, and make the article available as part of the International Journal of Wound Research.
Unless otherwise clearly indicated, the published Version of Record is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence (CC BY 4.0).
The CC BY 4.0 licence permits readers and other third parties to copy, share, distribute, reproduce, adapt, translate, and reuse the published article in any medium or format, including for commercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given to the authors and original publication, a link to the licence is provided, and any changes are indicated.
Authors may share, deposit, reproduce, distribute, adapt, translate, and otherwise reuse their own original work without requesting permission from the Journal or Publisher. The CC BY 4.0 licence governs reuse by readers and other third parties and does not restrict the authors’ exercise of the copyright they retain.
The Creative Commons licence applies only to material for which the authors or Publisher are legally entitled to grant that licence. Third-party material excluded from the licence must be clearly identified and may require separate permission for reuse.