Skip to main content
. 2020 Dec 30;42(5):953–961. doi: 10.1093/jbcr/iraa218

Table 1.

Survey as handed out to the participants. Questions BQ1–15a and b were asked after demonstration of each video (Video 1 and Supplementary Videos 2–15, respectively)

Video-based wound bed evaluation and therapy decision after enzymatic debridement (ED) for burn wound care
Please select one choice per question in parts A, B, and C of the survey.
Video-independent survey in parts A and C.
Video-dependent survey in part B.
Part A:
AQ1: What is your professional status?
chief physician/ consultant physician/ senior resident
AQ2: In which country is your burn center located?
Germany/ Switzerland/ Austria
AQ3: How often have you used ED for burn wound care?
<10 applications/ 10–19 applications/ 20–49 applications / ≥50 applications
AQ4: I feel confident in ED application for burn wound care.
Strong agreement/ agreement/ neutral/ disagreement/ strong disagreement
AQ5: I feel confident in wound bed evaluation and therapy decision post-ED.
Strong agreement/ agreement/ neutral/ disagreement/ strong disagreement
Part B:
BQ1–15a: How do you evaluate the wound bed post-ED (video 1–15)?
Uniform red or pink wound bed/ pinpoint bleedings/ large diameter bleeding points/ exposed fat or functional structures/ other character
BQ1–15b: What therapy would you initiate (video 1–15)?
Conservative care/ surgical therapy (eg, skin grafting)
Part C:
CQ1: Video is a feasible tool for post-ED wound bed evaluation and therapy decision.
Strong agreement/ agreement/ neutral/ disagreement/ strong disagreement
CQ2: Video is a beneficial tool for post-ED wound bed evaluation and therapy decision.
Strong agreement/ agreement/ neutral/ disagreement/ strong disagreement
CQ3: Video is useful for training users in post-ED wound bed evaluation and therapy decision.
Strong agreement/ agreement/ neutral/ disagreement/ strong disagreement