|
|
Ten years later
This past May the Wound Healing Society quietly celebrated a major milestone in its history. It was 10 years ago,May 11, 1989, that the Society was incorporated in the Commonwealth of Virginia, U.S.A. Therefore, it is anappropriate time to take a few minutes to reflect on the challenges that have been met over these years andattempt to foresee where the Society will be ten years hence.
The Wound Healing Society originated from a series of meetings held at the Uniformed Services Health ScienceUniversity in Bethesda, Maryland, U.S.A. during the spring and summer of 1988. These meetings developed theframework to establish the Society which had as its founding Board of Directors Adrian Barbul, MD, Michael D.Caldwell, MD, PhD, I. Kelman Cohen, MD, Robert F. Diegelmann, PhD, William H. Eaglstein, MD, H. PaulEhrlich, PhD, Thomas K. Hunt, MD, George R. Martin, PhD, Martin C. Robson, MD, and Anthony C. Sank, MD.
As with any organization, it was not developed in a contextual vacuum, nor without prior events which culminated in the Bethesda meetings. Placing the history of the Society in perspective will be the goal of a forthcoming history of the Society which will be published later this year. However, it should be noted here that while these discussions were taking place in Bethesda, in Belgium a group of like minded individuals organized by Professor Charles M. Lapière were discussing the formation of the International Tissue Repair Society, the forerunner of the European Tissue Repair Society.
The Society and its membership base in 1989/90 are quite different from the organization of 1999. The Society was established to meet the needs of physicians, surgeons, doctoral level researchers and other professionals with terminal academic degrees interested in a venue for exchange of biomedical information in the context of a traditional biomedical organization. The Society also had a mission to foster training in wound healing, serve as a resource and unified authority to government agencies and corporations, and to disseminate information in the area of tissue repair. Over these intervening years, the organization has obtained full-time society management services; published, along with other sponsoring societies, Wound Repair and Regeneration, a scholarly bimonthly journal; and developed sufficient financial reserves to develop a foundation to support research activity, to name but a few accomplishments.
Along with these achievements has been the development of a more diverse membership which includes a growing number of individuals primarily involved with patient care. This diversity has significantly strengthen the Society by the introduction and discussion of new ideas and concerns - educational programming, for example - as well as reinforcing the linkage between biomedical research and clinical practice. For instance, as the result of a tremendous growth in our knowledge of basic mechanisms of wound healing during the past decade, novel therapeutic modalities are being introduced including growth factor therapy, bioengineered tissues, and innovative wound dressings. This in turn has strengthened the need for increased educational opportunities for health care providers, calls for such programs as specialization training in wound healing and professional certification, and increased need for consultation with federal regulatory agencies. The Wound Healing Society is not alone in hoping to address these needs and is constantly challenged by the growth of organizations with competing interests. How should this organization respond to these challenges over the next ten years? Have the 1989 goals of the Society become outdated for the new millennium? Will the Society loose its focus and fail to adequately address the needs of any constituent group within the membership? These are critical questions that must be and are being addressed by the Society leadership (see Scars & Stripes 1999;9:6).
Over the past decade, the Society has grown from an initial 10 members to over 500 active members and continues to grow daily. With this growth has come the challenge to explore new and exciting opportunities while not loosing sight of the mission of the organization. It is incumbent on the leadership of the Society to keep the mission of the Society clearly in focus and determine what can be accomplished with excellence and which goals should be passed on to other organizations. The future of this Society and the field of wound healing in general is not one of limited horizons but rather one in which there are virtually too many activities for one organization to successfully undertake. Therefore, the leadership must choose wisely and provide an effective plan for the Society to reach its next decennial anniversary with a robust and satisfied membership.
William J. Lindblad, Ph.D.
Editor-in-Chief
|
|
