Wound care
clinical pathway, the cost of nurse time, and the long-term outcomes for patients. Lower limb wounds, for example, are the most common wound type managed by the NHS and one of the most expensive to treat. By improving healing rates and reducing recurrence, we can reduce spending on dressings and free up to 11% of community nursing time.3
But achieving this
requires a focus on outcomes, not inputs. The ABHI Wound Care Group is preparing a position statement on procurement to address these issues and to highlight the value drivers that should be incorporated into NHS tendering. The aim is to engage with NHS Supply Chain and NHS England to build a future procurement model that is grounded in clinical efficacy, sustainability, and patient outcomes. Examples from other sectors show the benefits
of such an approach. In orthopaedics, for instance, value-based procurement has demonstrated that focusing on long-term function and revision rates, rather than initial cost alone, results in significant financial and patient gains. Wound care should be treated no differently.
Sustainability should also be reframed
through the lens of outcomes. A healed wound has significantly less environmental impact than one that remains open, due to reduced dressing use, fewer nurse visits, and lower risk of complications. Judging technologies solely on material inputs, such as single-use packaging, without recognising their role in faster healing risks undermining a truly sustainable model of wound care. It is outcome-driven value, not the circular economy in isolation, that must guide procurement decisions.
Innovation and market access Wound care has seen important innovations over the past few decades, from the introduction of modern hydrocolloid dressings and negative pressure wound therapy, to the growing use and range of antimicrobial products. More recently, we have seen the emergence of portable negative pressure devices suitable for community use, and early applications of AI and digital diagnostics to assess wounds and support clinical decision-making. Yet, as in many areas of community-based
care, the system often struggles to adopt new technologies at pace. Routes to market can be slow and fragmented, particularly when products are prescribed in the community or fall under complex commissioning arrangements. The ABHI Wound Care Group works with the
wider ABHI network to ensure that innovation in wound care is recognised and supported through national initiatives. The goal is to ensure that promising technologies have a clear route to market through assessment, commissioning, and procurement processes. This includes influencing
the annual cost of wound care
£8.3 billion 50% 11%
of all community nurse activity is spent on wound care
national guidance, streamlining regulatory pathways, and ensuring that clinical stakeholders are aware of the value new products can offer. Furthermore, promising technologies are now being trialled which may significantly reshape the wound care landscape. These include bioengineered skin substitutes, advanced antimicrobial peptide therapies, and sensor-based systems that monitor wound status remotely. In the longer term, nanotechnology-based treatments and AI-powered decision support platforms could reduce healing times and improve outcomes. However, this requires proactive support from payers and commissioners. In addition, investment in real-world data collection and outcomes monitoring is crucial. Demonstrating impact through case studies, patient-reported outcomes, and cost modelling can help accelerate the uptake of innovative technologies.
Case Study: transforming care through technology Consider the example of a patient with a non-healing venous leg ulcer. Historically, such wounds could persist for months, requiring frequent nurse visits and extensive dressing changes. By introducing a portable negative pressure wound therapy device alongside compression therapy, healing times were halved, and the number of required home visits significantly reduced. In this case, the upfront cost of the technology was offset many times
58
www.clinicalservicesjournal.com I September 2025
of community nurses’ time could be saved with improved healing rates
over through reduced community care input and faster patient recovery. Beyond financial savings, the patient reported
improved quality of life, reduced pain, and greater independence. These kinds of outcomes must become the norm, not the exception.
Voices from the frontline: lived experience and everyday impact Many patients living with chronic wounds describe the emotional toll as being equal to or greater than the physical discomfort. Long- term pain, social isolation, embarrassment about visible dressings or odour, and the loss of mobility and independence are frequently cited. Patients often speak of being “trapped”4
in their
own homes and forgotten by the system. Others recount having to wait weeks for referrals or dressing changes due to staff shortages. Clinicians on the frontline face similar
frustrations. Recent findings from the Queen’s Nursing Institute and Wounds UK5
highlight how
many community nurses feel unable to deliver the standard of care they strive for, citing time pressures, workforce shortages, and limited access to appropriate products and training. These real-world challenges underscore the urgent need for a more responsive and equitable system of wound care.
Continuing the Mission of NWCSP Until March 2025,6
the National Wound Care Strategy Programme (NWCSP) provided
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80
