An interventional study of NanoSALV Catalytic in Pressure Injury, Venous Leg Ulcer and Pressure Injury Stage 2, sponsored by Chester Ho, MD. Completed at 4 sites in Canada. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-11-07.
Sponsored by Chester Ho, MD · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
The goal of this clinical trial is to assess the impact that the NanoSALV wound dressing can have on managing severe chronic wounds and feasibility for patients, providers, and health systems in different health care settings (community care, continuing care and in-patient care).
The main questions it aims to answer are:
The sequence and duration of the trial is as follows:
Semi-structured interviews and observations will be done with care providers/patients and healthcare professionals in the control period to explore the perspectives on the current state of chronic wound management, and in the intervention period to evaluate the perceptions on the usability of the intervention.
BACKGROUND:
Chronic wounds include, but are not limited, to diabetic foot ulcers (DFU), venous leg ulcers (VLU), and pressure ulcers. They are a challenge to wound care professionals and consume a great deal of healthcare resources. Chronic wounds are defined as wounds that fail to proceed through the normal phases of wound healing in an orderly and timely manner. Venous Leg Ulcer (VLU) is a recurrent chronic wound on the lower leg, and it is associated with venous obstruction or reflux, both of which also lead to poor venous flow and venous hypertension. A pressure injury (also known as a pressure ulcer) is defined by the National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel as a "localized damage to the skin and underlying soft tissue usually over a bony prominence or related to medical or other devices. The injury can present as intact skin or an open ulcer and may be painful". The development of a pressure injury is influenced by a variety of factors including age, mobility, nutrition, and other comorbid diseases/conditions. DFU is a frequent complication and hospitalization for individuals with diabetes mellitus (DM). As a result, these regions with limited sensitivity and chronic trauma can progress to an ulcer, potentially causing ischemia to the deep tissues, sometimes including the bone. These ulcerative tissues are highly susceptible to colonization and infection by multiple bacteria, and often result from the improper lack of care (debridement, antibacterials, etc). More severe DFUs may require surgical intervention and amputation, to prevent progression.
Pressure injuries have significant negative consequences for both patients and the health system. They compromise patient health outcomes, have been found to cause pain, hinder functional recovery and present a high risk for the development of serious infections. They have also been associated with an extended length of stay, sepsis and mortality. In a similar manner, VLU has significant social and economic burden to the patient and the healthcare system. Patient mobility, health-related quality of life, social roles, employment, and physical activity are negatively affected by this condition. Furthermore, besides the high quality of life and mortality burden related to DFU and amputations, health care costs and economic burden related to this issue are also high. Patients with DM complications, such as DFU, require frequent and significant medical care with expensive medical supplies and are often unable to work due to disease management issues and disability/mobility challenges.
Currently, the most effective practices for the treatment of chronic wounds involve: Cleansing (e.g.: with sterile water or saline), Debriding (e.g.: autolytic, mechanical, enzymatic etc.), managing bacterial balance (e.g.: with antibiotics) and managing moisture balance (e.g.: with draining). Dressings are recommended to promote healing (e.g.: to support drainage and provide tissue protection) and prevent infection (e.g.: antimicrobial products such as those impregnated with silver, honey or iodine). However, these products have drawbacks such as: not being able to conform to or sufficiently cover the wound, pain with wearing and/or removal, and only functioning to either promote healing OR treat the infection. An innovative solution should have features such as the ability to conform to the wound regardless of wound topography, be able to be worn for long periods, not be painful to wear, and have combined actions to simultaneously promote healing and be antimicrobial.
NanoSALV is a hydrogel wound dressing that contains NanoKARE technology, which is an advanced composite material that provides broad-spectrum antimicrobial and catalytic effects that reduce the thresholds needed to achieve optimal healing potential. NanoSALV wound dressing gel provides broad-spectrum antimicrobial effect against bacteria, fungi and viruses, and catalytic effects to achieve optimal healing potential. Has passed skin sensitization, irritation, acute systemic toxicity, and cytotoxicity during in-vitro testing. There are no known adverse events or reactions.
Antimicrobial efficacy in-vitro testing of NanoKARE technology ranged from 0.5-6% for minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and 0.5-8% minimum bactericidal concentration (MBC) for all microorganisms tested. MIC/MBC testing was performed by JMI Laboratories. Biofilm in-vitro testing showed the technology was effective at eliminating all resistant biofilms tested and effectively prevented the formation of all biofilm strains. SARS-CoV-2 in-vitro surface testing also showed 99.9% reduction in viral strains after 30s of exposure and lasted up to 7 days after a single surface application. These tests were fully funded by the Canadian Department of Defense.
OBJECTIVE:
Objective: To assess the implementation feasibility and impact that a potential innovative solution NanoSalv to manage severe chronic wounds and pressure injuries may bring to the patient, provider and health system.
Patients with diabetic foot ulcers, venous leg ulcers and stage II to IV pressure injuries will be recruited. Each patient will receive four weeks of the standard of care and four weeks of the intervention.
Weekly wound assessments will be done and wound images will be captured by a 3D medical camera that digitally takes measurements. Patients will be shown their wound images to show their progress of wound healing.
To explore the perspectives on the current state of chronic wound management, review of care plan protocols, policies and procedures, Likert scales, and semi-structured interviews and observations will be done with care providers/patients and healthcare professionals from the different sites during the control period. To evaluate the perceptions on the usability of and experience with the intervention, semi-structured interviews and observations, and Likert scales will be done with the previously mentioned users of the intervention in the intervention period throughout the project implementation. The data collected will be analyzed using journey mapping, comparative task analysis, thematic analysis, and workflow analysis.
Sample Size:
The sample size was determined based in part on the feasibility of recruiting patients in the given timeline and the project personnel provided. A sample size of 95 patients with 10 weeks to recruit would average recruiting 8-9 patients per week. For the qualitative methods involving semi-structured interviews on current perspectives of standard care, interviews on perceptions, and usability of the intervention, 9-20 participants will be recruited to participate over the duration of the study period.
The sequence and duration of all trial periods is as follows:
Initiation:
Control Period:
Intervention Period:
526 studies on the registry are indexed under Pressure Ulcer; 120 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 44 is below the median of 70 across 401 interventional studies indexed under Pressure Ulcer.
Browse Pressure Ulcer studies →This is the only study on the registry with Chester Ho, MD as lead sponsor.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Chronic wound inclusion criteria:
Pressure Injury
Diabetic Foot Ulcer
Venous / Leg Ulcer
- Ulcer area post debridement between 2cm\^2 and 50cm\^2
Exclusion Criteria:
Patients receive the current standard of care for their chronic wound in the first four weeks of enrollment Standard of care (SOC) involves: * Offloading of pressure as needed * High compression bandaging, as needed * Debridement, as needed * Nutrition management, as needed * SOC dressings, such as silver/iodine dressings, antibiotic ointment * Management of infection * Management of pain during debridement, as needed
Patients receive the intervention, NanoSALV wound dressing, in the consecutive four weeks following the control period
Device: NanoSALV Catalytic
NanoSALV Catalytic Antimicrobial Wound Dressing Gel is a Health Canada approved medical device for the management of Chronic Wounds.
Soft Cost Savings
Evaluation of the cost savings during the intervention period compared to the control period, by tracking indirect and direct costs including but not limited to, wound dressing costs, duration of treatment, frequency of dressing changes, in-clinic visit frequency, time and duration, in-home patient care, wound reduction rates, expenditure during control period and expenditure during intervention period, etc. This would be evaluated by a health economist and economic analysis support by the study sponsor.
Time frame: Through study completion over four months
User Satisfaction
Qualitative evaluation of the patient's and care provider's satisfaction with the Innovation in comparison to standard of care to inform future adoption decisions. Measured by: follow-up with User's desire to continue intervention over standard of care wound dressings as measured by the number of user's who sign up to continue with the intervention.
Time frame: Through study completion over four months
User Experience
Qualitative evaluation of the patient's and care provider's experience with the Innovation in comparison to standard of care to inform future adoption decisions. Measured by: Semi-structured interview themes will also be recorded to understand enablers and barriers to product use.
Time frame: Through study completion over four months
Process Improvement
Evaluation of workflow considerations with the Innovation in comparison to the standard of care. Measured by: documenting the frequency of dressing changes, and person who completes dressing changes to determine adoption and ability to change dressings outside of a healthcare setting. Task analysis will be conducted during the control and intervention to compare differences and similarities in tasks required to change dressing.
Time frame: Through study completion over four months
Quality Improvement
Evaluation of performance with the Innovation in comparison to the standard of care. Measured by: Subjective observations by human factors study team will be documented and follow-up interviews will be coded to reflect themes of enablers and barriers to standard of care vs intervention
Time frame: Through study completion over four months
Wound percent area change
Measured by: photographs of the wound using Aranz Silhouette Star 3D camera followed by wound area tracing and area analysis using Aranz Silhouette Star software.
Time frame: Weekly assessments over 8 weeks
Wound percent volume change
Measured by: photographs of the wound using Aranz Silhouette Star 3D camera followed by wound area tracing and volume analysis using Aranz Silhouette Star software.
Time frame: Weekly assessments over 8 weeks
Adverse events
Measured by: the number of confirmed adverse events documented.
Time frame: Through study completion over four months
Patient preference
Evaluation of the patient's satisfaction with the use of NanoSALV in comparison to standard of care. Measured by: Patient's choice of continuing with SOC or NanoSALV after study completion
Time frame: Weekly assessments over 8 weeks
Patient satisfaction - ease of use
Evaluation of the patient's satisfaction with the use of NanoSALV in comparison to standard of care. Measured by: comparing patient satisfaction surveys post control and intervention periods using 10-point Likert scales assessing ease of use
Time frame: Change between Day 28 and Day 56 of study enrollment
Patient satisfaction - comfort
Evaluation of the patient's satisfaction with the use of NanoSALV in comparison to standard of care. Measured by: comparing patient satisfaction surveys post control and intervention periods using 10-point Likert scales assessing comfort of wound dressing
Time frame: Change between Day 28 and Day 56 of study enrollment
Patient satisfaction - overall satisfaction
Evaluation of the patient's satisfaction with the use of NanoSALV in comparison to standard of care. Measured by: comparing patient satisfaction surveys post control and intervention periods using 10-point Likert scales assessing overall satisfaction with wound dressing
Time frame: Change between Day 28 and Day 56 of study enrollment
This study is completed, as verified in Nov 2023. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.