Your web browser is out of date.

For your security and improved experience online, please update your browser.

This site is intended for healthcare professionals only
×
Share this article
Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on email
Email
Share on print
Print

Accelerated healing: what can we do to achieve optimal healing times?

Diabetic foot ulcers often remain difficult to heal. It is vital that the clinician has an understanding of the wound healing process so that an effective care plan can be made to accelerate healing of ulceration. This article provides an overview of the process and outlines preventive approaches to ulceration. It stresses the importance of wound assessment and presents treatment choices that can be used to speed up healing and help the patient avoid the need for amputation.

Once the skin is broken, the body responds to repair the injured area. Failure to heal can result in ulceration. A foot ulcer is thought to precede 75–85% of amputations in people with diabetes (Boulton et al, 2005) with an estimated cost of £1bn to the NHS in England. Two-thirds of the cost is spent on treating foot ulcers in primary, community and outpatient settings (Kerr et al, 2019). Alongside the cost to the NHS, foot ulcers have been shown to reduce quality of life (Ribu et al, 2007).

Understanding the wound healing process and undertaking a full wound assessment can reduce costs to the NHS and to the patient. This article aims to give readers an understanding of the factors that need to be considered when assessing a wound and seeking to provide optimum healing of the injured area.

Factors to help improve healing
Relieving pressure
Trauma or continued pressure can close off capillaries and reduce blood supply to the tissue, causing damage and delay to the healing process. Therefore, reducing pressure is key to optimise healing. Total contact casting (TCC) is considered the gold standard treatment for those with neuropathic ulceration. It reduces pressure to the affected area by load sharing, with the proximal portion of the cast carrying most of the load. A study by Shaw et al (1997) obtained results from more than 750 foot contacts to conclude that forefoot pressure is significantly reduced in a TCC where the cast wall takes about 30% of the load directly from the leg. The same benefits were not identified with heel pressure relief.

It is the author’s experience that few patients follow the recommended course of TCC to aid healing, preferring other strategies, such as removable walkers, to help offload. This may not be as effective, but it is easier for the patient to tolerate. One study showed that even the most compliant of patients wore their removable walker for 68% of the time and perhaps the most important attribute of a TCC is that it ‘forces compliance’ (Armstrong et al 2001).

Load redistribution is considered to play a smaller role. This is where plantar pressures are applied over a greater area thereby also reducing pressures in the ulcerated area (Greenhagen,  2012). In relation to plantar neuropathic ulcers there is some limited evidence that therapeutic shoes help to reduce planter pressures and aid healing (Bus et al, 2016).

Surgical intervention should also be considered where ankle equinus is recognised as a contributing factor to increase forces and plantar foot ulceration (Greenhagen et al, 2012). Options would be for a tendo-achilles lengthening or gastrocnemius recession to reduce these pressures and aid healing.

Pressure relief is a key component not only to promote healing but also to prevent ulceration.

Debridement
Viable tissue supports viable tissue. When there is a sufficient blood supply, debridement should be encouraged as non-viable tissue, including macerated tissue, is a breeding ground for bacteria and must be removed to support growth of healthy tissue. Sharp debridement of a wound can also remove or weaken biofilms (Wolcott et al, 2013).

Recognising infection
Infection can be localised, causing damage and necrosis in the tissues affected, and systemic symptoms can take hold within a matter of hours. People with diabetes with infected wounds are 56 times more likely to be admitted to hospital than a person without diabetes and be at risk of amputation (Frykberg et al 2006). It is, therefore, crucial to be able to recognise these symptoms early to avoid losing a limb.

Diagnosing infection can be difficult in patients with diabetes, as usual markers may not be evident. A patient with neuropathy ‘may not report pain or fever or present with leucocytosis but will have increased oedema and wound exudate. A patient with an ischaemic ulcer of peripheral vascular disease may report pain, erythema, fever and leucoytosis but not have perfusion sufficient to produce oedema or increase wound exudate’ (Wound Source, 2018).

All hospital, primary care and community settings should have guidelines for the use of antibiotics covering the care pathway for managing diabetic foot infection that consider local patterns of resistance but definitive therapy should be based on cultures of infected tissue after debridement (Lipsky et al, 2012).

Oxygen
There is an increase in consumption of oxygen (O2) by active cells promoting cell metabolism which also helps prevent infection. Temporary hypoxia after injury triggers wound healing but prolonged or chronic hypoxia delays wound healing (Bishop, 2008). Hyperbaric O2 therapy (HBOT) can counteract the influence of tissue hypoxia but there is little evidence to support its use except where using it as part of a clinical trial (NICE, 2015).

Wound assessment/classification
The wound healing process consists of four stages which the wound goes through:
n Inflammatory phase: the body’s emergency response to initial injury. The main aim is to prevent blood loss from tissue damage and vasodilation to allow fluid to carry the cells responsible for healing to enter the wound displaying the classic signs of heat, swelling and pain. This can last 10–15 minutes

  • Destruction: debris is removed and the wound is cleaned with help from white blood cells which release chemicals to digest bacteria or tissue debris. These white cells die off leaving a creamy layer of slough. This can take 1–6 days
  • Proliferation: this can only take place once the wound site has been cleared. New tissue is regenerated by fibroblasts which build blood vessels, collagen and other connective tissue to form granulation tissue. This starts off being pale pink but becomes bright red as it matures. This can last 3–24 days
  • Maturation: it can take 21 days to 2 years for epithelial cells to move across granulation tissue to help the edges come together to heal (Brown, 2015).

By acknowledging these phases, it is clear to see why there can be numerous factors to consider when healing is delayed. Box 1 lists some of the factors which may influence these stages of wound healing. Underlying comorbidities may also affect healing and need to be addressed to promote this complex process.

Having made an assessment on the phase of the wound, it would also be advised to determine the classification of an ulcer, to decide on the most appropriate care plan.
There is no universally accepted diabetic foot ulcer classification system. NICE (2015) advocates the use of either Texas or SINBAD — which focuses on site, ischaemia, neuropathy, bacterial infection, area and depth (Ince 2008), and the recently published guidance from the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (2019) also recommends using SINBAD to help determine factors required to heal the ulcer. The first action of which is to refer to a multidisciplinary diabetic foot team. Before deciding on a dressing, a wound assessment needs to be carried out and as a minimum it should include the elements listed in Box 2.

Dressing selection
There is little evidence to support the use of a particular dressing for diabetic foot ulceration (Wu et al, 2014) but following an assessment, it would seem appropriate to follow NICE (2015) guidance and “choose the least costly dressing of the type that meets the required characteristics appropriate for the type of wound and its stages of healing”. Recent published recommendations suggests that dressings containing antimicrobial agents should not be used if their sole aim is to improve healing or propose to alter the ‘wound biology’, such as reduce biofilm (IWGDF, 2019). There is some evidence for the use of sucrose-octasulfate impregnated dressing in non-infected, neuroischaemic ulcers which has been shown to reduce healing times over a 20-week period (Edmonds et al, 2018).

Providing the right environment for healing to take place needs to be considered when selecting the most appropriate dressing. It is generally accepted that wounds require a moist environment to allow healing, except where the area needs to be dry, for example, in the case of an ischaemic wound (Health Service Executive, 2018). However, excess moisture or maceration can lead to an increased bacterial burden and subsequently have a negative effect on the state of the wound.

Poor dressing choice can also add to problems where fibres may be left in the wound, exudate remains unmanaged and drawn away from the healthy tissue or the bandage is too tight and restricts much needed blood flow to the wound (Brown, 2018). The wound needs to be reassessed at every dressing change and if it is not showing signs of improvement, it will be necessary to reconsider the care plan.

The future
The recently published guidelines on wound healing interventions from the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) report on strategies to help ulcers heal after delivering the best standard of care. There are new strategies to aid healing of chronic, difficult-to-heal wounds including placental derived products and a combined leucocyte, platelet and fibrin autologous product (IWGDF, 2019).

Technology also plays a role with the development of mobile phone apps to help patients self-care (Ogrin et al, 2018), which may also help to engage patients with their care and potentially contribute to promoting behaviour that improves healing.
Perhaps the best intervention is prevention, however not all wounds are preventable and being able to assess and understand what is required is paramount to optimise healing times. Thus, the best standard of care is early referral to the appropriate healthcare professionals; members of the multidisciplinary team who can assess and provide the best treatment plan to aid healing if ulceration occurs.

Armstrong DG, Nguyen HC, Lavery LA et al (2001) Off-loading the diabetic foot wound: a randomized clinical trial. Diabetes Care 24(6): 1019–22

Bishop A (2008) Role of oxygen in wound healing. J Wound Care 17(9): 399–402

Boulton AJ, Vileikyte L, Ragnarson-Tennvall G, Apelqvist J (2005) The global burden of diabetic foot disease. Lancet 366(9498): 1719–24

Brown A (2015) Wound management 1: phases of the wound healing process. Nursing Times 111(46): 12–13

Brown A (2018) Diagnosing and managing infection in acute and chronic wounds. Nursing Times 114(7): 36–41

Bus SA, van Deursen RW, Armstrong DG et al (2016) Footwear and offloading interventions to prevent and heal foot ulcers and reduce plantar pressure in patients with diabetes: a systematic review. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 32(Suppl 1): 99–118

Edmonds M, Lázaro-Martínez JL, Alfayate-García JM (2018) Sucrose octasulfate dressing versus control dressing in patients with neuroischaemic diabetic foot ulcers (Explorer): an international, multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 6(3): 186–96

Frykberg RG, Zgonis T, Armstrong DG et al (2006) American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons. Diabetic foot disorders. A clinical practice guideline (2006 revision). J Foot Ankle Surg 45(5 Suppl): S1–66

Greenhagen R (2012) Complications of total contact casting. The benefits of using TCC still far outweigh any risks. Podiatry Management June/July: 153–8

Greenhagen RM, Johnson AR, Bevilacqua NJ, Greenhagen R (2012) Gastrocnemius recession or tendo-achilles lengthening for equinus deformity in the diabetic foot? Clin Podiatr Med Surg 29(3): 413–24

Guo S, DiPietro LA (2010) Factors affecting wound healing. J Dent Res 89(3): 219–29

Health Service Executive (2018) HSE National Wound Management Guidelines 2018. HSE, Dublin. Available at: https://bit.ly/2y9Hkot (accessed 21.10.2019)

Ince P (2008) Use of the SINBAD classification system and score in comparing outcome of foot ulcer management on three continents. Diabetes Care 31(5): 964–7

Kerr M, Barron E, Chadwick P et al (2019) The cost of diabetic foot ulcers and amputations to the National Health Service in England. Diabet Med 36(8): 995–1002

International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (2019) IWGDF Guidelines on the Prevention and Management of Diabetic Foot Disease. Available at: https://iwgdfguidelines.org/guidelines/ (accessed 21.10.2019)

Lipsky BA, Berendt AR, Cornia PB et al (2012) 2012 Infectious Diseases Society of America clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot infections. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 103(1): 2–7

National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (2015) NICE Guideline [NG19] Diabetic Foot Problems: Prevention and Management. NICE, London. Available at: https://bit.ly/2P5fK63 (21.10.2019)

Ogrin R, Viswanathan R, Aylen T et al (2018) Co-design of an evidence‐based health education diabetes foot app to prevent serious foot complications: a feasibility study. Practical Diabetes 35(6): 203–9

Ribu L, Hanestad BR, Moum T et al (2007) A comparison of the health-related quality of life in patients with diabetic foot ulcers, with a diabetes group and a nondiabetes group from the general population. Qual Life Res 16(2): 179–89

Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (2017) Management of Diabetes: A National Clinical Guideline. SIGN 116. SIGN, Edinburgh. Available at: https://bit.ly/2LcEDat (21.10.2019)

Shaw JE, Hsi W, Ulbrecht JS et al (1997) The mechanism of plantar unloading in total contact casts: implications for design and clinical use. Foot Ankle Int 18(12): 809–17

Stang P, Young M, Wilson D et al (2018) The role of topical oxygen therapy in the management of diabetic foot ulcer wounds in Scotland: round table recommendations. Diabetic Foot J 21(1): 56–61

Vileikyte L (2001) Diabetic foot ulcers: a quality of life issue. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 17(4): 246–9

Wolcott RD, Kennedy JP, Dowd SE (2013) Regular debridement is the main tool for maintaining a healthy wound bed in most chronic wounds. J Wound Care 18(2): 54–6

Wound Source (2018) Controlling Bacterial Burden in Chronic Wounds. Available at: https://bit.ly/2pDrstV (accessed  21.10.2019)

Wu  L, Norman  G, Dumville  JC et al (2015) Dressings for treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes: an overview of systematic reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 7:CD010471

Share this article
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on email
Share on whatsapp
For the latest news and articles

Sign up to all DiabetesontheNet journals

© Copyright Omniamed Communications. All Rights Reserved​
108 Cannon Street, London, EC4N 6EU. Registered in the United Kingdom​
Omniamed logo white
For the latest news and articles

Sign up to all DiabetesontheNet journals

 

By clicking ‘Subscribe’, you are agreeing that DiabetesontheNet.com are able to email you periodic newsletters. You may unsubscribe from these at any time. Your info is safe with us and we will never sell or trade your details. For information please review our Privacy Policy.

DiabetesontheNet Logo

This website is for UK healthcare professionals only. To continue, please confirm that you are a UK healthcare professional below.