M. Patel
An interview study to determine the experiences of cellulitis diagnosis amongst health care professionals in the UK
Patel, M.; Lee, S.I.; Levell, N.J.; Smart, P.; Kai, J.; Thomas, K.S.; Leighton, P.
Authors
S.I. Lee
N.J. Levell
P. Smart
Professor JOE KAI joe.kai@nottingham.ac.uk
PROFESSOR OF PRIMARY CARE
Professor KIM THOMAS KIM.THOMAS@NOTTINGHAM.AC.UK
PROFESSOR OF APPLIED DERMATOLOGY RESEARCH
Dr PAUL LEIGHTON PAUL.LEIGHTON@NOTTINGHAM.AC.UK
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF APPLIED HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH
Abstract
Objectives: To explore health care professionals (HCPs) experiences and challenges in diagnosing suspected lower limb cellulitis.
Setting: UK nationwide.
Participants: 20 qualified HCPs, who had a minimum of two years clinical experience as a HCP in the national health service and had managed a clinical case of suspected cellulitis of the lower limb in the UK. HCPs were recruited from departments of dermatology (including a specialist cellulitis clinic), general practice, tissue viability, lymphoedema services, general surgery, emergency care and acute medicine. Purposive sampling was employed to ensure that participants included consultant doctors, trainee doctors and nurses across the specialties listed above. Participants were recruited through: national networks, HCPs who contributed to the cellulitis priority setting partnership (PSP), UK Dermatology Clinical Trials Network, snowball sampling where participants helped recruit other participants, personal networks of the authors.
Primary and secondary outcomes: Primary outcome was to describe the key clinical features which inform the diagnosis of lower limb cellulitis. Secondary outcome was to explore the difficulties in making a diagnosis of lower limb cellulitis.
Results: The presentation of lower limb cellulitis changes as the episode runs its course. Therefore, different specialties see clinical features at varying stages of cellulitis. Clinical experience is essential to being confident in making a diagnosis, but even amongst experienced HCPs, there were differences in the clinical rationale of diagnosis. A group of core clinical features were suggested, many of which overlapped with alternative diagnoses. This emphasises how the diagnosis is challenging, with objective aids and a greater understanding of the mimics of cellulitis required.
Conclusion: Cellulitis is a complex diagnosis and has a variable clinical presentation at different stages. Although cellulitis is a common diagnosis to make, HCPs need to be mindful of alternative diagnoses.
Citation
Patel, M., Lee, S., Levell, N., Smart, P., Kai, J., Thomas, K., & Leighton, P. (2020). An interview study to determine the experiences of cellulitis diagnosis amongst health care professionals in the UK. BMJ Open, 10, Article e034692. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034692
Journal Article Type | Article |
---|---|
Acceptance Date | Sep 7, 2020 |
Online Publication Date | Oct 14, 2020 |
Publication Date | Oct 14, 2020 |
Deposit Date | Sep 25, 2020 |
Publicly Available Date | Oct 14, 2020 |
Journal | BMJ Open |
Electronic ISSN | 2044-6055 |
Publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
Peer Reviewed | Peer Reviewed |
Volume | 10 |
Article Number | e034692 |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034692 |
Public URL | https://nottingham-repository.worktribe.com/output/4923912 |
Publisher URL | https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/10/10/e034692 |
Files
interview study to determine the experiences of cellulitis diagnosis
(902 Kb)
PDF
Publisher Licence URL
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
You might also like
Effect of smoking status on the efficacy of the SMART regimen in high risk asthma
(2016)
Journal Article
The red leg dilemma: a scoping review of the challenges of diagnosing lower limb cellulitis
(2018)
Journal Article
Downloadable Citations
About Repository@Nottingham
Administrator e-mail: discovery-access-systems@nottingham.ac.uk
This application uses the following open-source libraries:
SheetJS Community Edition
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
PDF.js
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
Font Awesome
SIL OFL 1.1 (http://scripts.sil.org/OFL)
MIT License (http://opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.html)
CC BY 3.0 ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
Powered by Worktribe © 2024
Advanced Search