29 January 2019

Survey confirms T.I.M.E. as the most frequently used wound assessment tool as Smith & Nephew further strengthens commitment to help improve the consistency of wound care

Smith & Nephew (NYSE:SNN; LSE:SN), the global medical technology business, today announced the results of a survey revealing that 57% of respondents use the T.I.M.E. (Tissue, Inflammation, Moisture, Edges) wound assessment tool. Published in Wounds International, the survey was conducted amongst nearly 200 wound care specialists from 52 countries attending the European Wound Management Association (EWMA) Conference in May 2018.1

The survey also demonstrated that there is still significant variation in wound care practice amongst nurses. More than a third of respondents did not routinely use wound assessment tools and there is considerable variability in clinical practice.1 A previous study has also shown that clinical and economic benefits could accrue from improved systems of care.2

“T.I.M.E. remains the most frequently used wound assessment framework.” said Professor Karen Ousey, lead author and Director at the Institute of Skin Integrity and Infection Prevention. “However, the survey also confirms that variation in practice still exists, and more work is needed to validate practical ways of implementing wound assessment tools and therapeutic decisions in clinical practice and reduce variability in outcomes.”                               

The T.I.M.E. framework was first developed by an international group of wound healing experts to provide a structured approach to wound bed preparation.3,4 The T stands for tissue non-viable, I for infection and/or inflammation, M for moisture imbalance and E for edges of wound non-advancing. Early in 2018, Smith & Nephew launched T.I.M.E. plan-on-a-page (POP), a tool designed to aid clinicians in their routine decision-making around chronic wounds to help them improve consistency in daily practice.

“Reducing variation in practice is key to improving outcomes. This means consistently getting the most appropriate treatment and technology, to the right person, at the right time, in the right place.” said Paolo Di Vincenzo, Smith & Nephew’s Senior Vice President Global Marketing,  Advanced Wound Management. “This is why we have collaborated with expert and experienced practitioners and researchers to develop the new T.I.M.E. POP, which is an easier and improved way to implement T.I.M.E.3,4 in routine daily practice more broadly to help reduce practice variation.”

To learn more about the survey results please visit http://www.smith-nephew.com/time/

Enquiries

Media

 

Dave Snyder

+1 (978) 749-1440

Smith & Nephew

 

About Smith & Nephew

Smith & Nephew is a global medical technology business dedicated to helping healthcare professionals improve people's lives. With leadership positions in Orthopaedic Reconstruction, Advanced Wound Management, Sports Medicine and Trauma & Extremities, Smith & Nephew has around 15,000 employees and a presence in more than 100 countries. Annual sales in 2017 were almost $4.8 billion. Smith & Nephew is a member of the FTSE100 (LSE:SN, NYSE:SNN).

For more information about Smith & Nephew, please visit our website www.smith-nephew.com, follow @SmithNephewplc on Twitter or visit SmithNephewplc on Facebook.com.

To learn more about how we can help you get CLOSER TO ZERO™ delay in wound healing, please visit www.closertozero.com

Forward-looking Statements

This document may contain forward-looking statements that may or may not prove accurate. For example, statements regarding expected revenue growth and trading margins, market trends and our product pipeline are forward-looking statements. Phrases such as "aim", "plan", "intend", "anticipate", "well-placed", "believe", "estimate", "expect", "target", "consider" and similar expressions are generally intended to identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from what is expressed or implied by the statements. For Smith & Nephew, these factors include: economic and financial conditions in the markets we serve, especially those affecting health care providers, payers and customers; price levels for established and innovative medical devices; developments in medical technology; regulatory approvals, reimbursement decisions or other government actions; product defects or recalls or other problems with quality management systems or failure to comply with related regulations; litigation relating to patent or other claims; legal compliance risks and related investigative, remedial or enforcement actions; disruption to our supply chain or operations or those of our suppliers; competition for qualified personnel; strategic actions, including acquisitions and dispositions, our success in performing due diligence, valuing and integrating acquired businesses; disruption that may result from transactions or other changes we make in our business plans or organisation to adapt to market developments; and numerous other matters that affect us or our markets, including those of a political, economic, business, competitive or reputational nature. Please refer to the documents that Smith & Nephew has filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission under the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including Smith & Nephew's most recent annual report on Form 20-F, for a discussion of certain of these factors. Any forward-looking statement is based on information available to Smith & Nephew as of the date of the statement. All written or oral forward-looking statements attributable to Smith & Nephew are qualified by this caution. Smith & Nephew does not undertake any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statement to reflect any change in circumstances or in Smith & Nephew's expectations.

Trademark of Smith & Nephew.  Certain marks registered US Patent and Trademark Office.

References

1. Ousey K, Gilchrist B, Jaimes H. Understanding clinical practice challenges: a survey performed with wound care clinicians to explore wound assessment frameworks. Wounds International. 2018;9(4):58-62.

2. Guest JF, Vowden K, Vowden P. The health economic burden that acute and chronic wounds impose on an average clinical commissioning group/health board in the UK. J Wound Care. 2017;26(6):292-303.

3. Schultz GS, Sibbald RG, Falanga V et al. Wound bed preparation: a systematic approach to wound management. Wound Rep Reg. 2003;11(Suppl. 1):S1-28.

4. Leaper DJ, Schultz G, Carville K, Fletcher J, Swanson T, Drake R. Extending the T.I.M.E. concept: what have we learned in the past 10 years? Int Wound J. 2012;9(Suppl. 2):1–19.

Title

Text