We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
The Rational Clinical Examination |

Does This Patient Have an Infection of a Chronic Wound?

Madhuri Reddy, MD, MSc; Sudeep S. Gill, MD, MSc; Wei Wu, MSc; Sunila R. Kalkar, MD, MBBS; Paula A. Rochon, MD, MPH
JAMA. 2012;307(6):605-611. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.98.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Context Chronic wounds (those that have not undergone orderly healing) are commonly encountered, but determining whether wounds are infected is often difficult. The current reference standard for the diagnosis of infection of a chronic wound is a deep tissue biopsy culture, which is an invasive procedure.

Objectives To determine the accuracy of clinical symptoms and signs to diagnose infection in chronic wounds and to determine whether there is a preferred noninvasive method for culturing chronic wounds.

Data Sources We searched multiple databases from inception through November 18, 2011, to identify studies focusing on diagnosis of infection in a chronic wound.

Study Selection Original studies were selected if they had extractable data describing historical features, symptoms, signs, or laboratory markers or were radiologic studies compared with a reference standard for diagnosing infection in patients with chronic wounds. Of 341 studies initially retrieved, 15 form the basis of this review. These studies include 985 participants with a total of 1056 chronic wounds. The summary prevalence of wound infection was 53%.

Data Extraction Three authors independently assigned each study a quality grade, using previously published criteria. One author abstracted operating characteristic data.

Data Synthesis An increase in the level of pain (likelihood ratio range, 11-20) made infection more likely, but its absence (negative likelihood ratio range, 0.64-0.88) did not rule out infection. Other items in the history and physical examination, in isolation or in combination, appeared to have limited utility when infection was diagnosed in chronic wounds. Routine laboratory studies had uncertain value in predicting infection of a chronic wound.

Conclusions The presence of increasing pain may make infection of a chronic wound more likely. Further evidence is required to determine which, if any, type of quantitative swab culture is most diagnostic.



Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?





You need to register in order to view this quiz.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

11 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

See Also...
Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles

The Rational Clinical Examination: Evidence-Based Clinical Diagnosis
Original Article: What Can the Medical History and Physical Examination Tell Us About Low Back Pain?

The Rational Clinical Examination: Evidence-Based Clinical Diagnosis
Is There Evidence of Systemic Disease?