Literature DB >> 10827654

Infection control properties of some wound dressings.

P G Bowler1, S A Jones, B J Davies, E Coyle.   

Abstract

The ability of some wound dressings to sequester and retain micro-organisms associated with wound fluid is perceived to provide beneficial properties regarding infection control. This study used an in vitro model to investigate and compare such properties in a range of fibrous absorbent dressings (alginate, hydrofibre and hydrophobic). Dressings were challenged with a simulated wound fluid containing common wound pathogens (Staphylococcus aureus or Pseudomonas aeruginosa). Bacterial sequestering and binding levels were monitored over time. A hydrofibre dressing and two calcium alginate dressings were shown to effectively sequester challenge organisms from a simulated wound fluid. However, the hydrophobic and hydrofibre dressings produced statistically significant results in their ability to adsorb and retain challenge organisms (p < 0.05). These investigations have demonstrated that a hydrofibre dressing effectively sequesters and retains micro-organisms upon exposure to simulated wound fluid, and may therefore provide a passive mechanism for reducing the microbial load in wounds and in the surrounding environment. Further in vivo studies are required to investigate these dressing properties.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10827654     DOI: 10.12968/jowc.1999.8.10.26356

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Wound Care        ISSN: 0969-0700            Impact factor:   2.072


  10 in total

Review 1.  A dressing history.

Authors:  Douglas Queen; Heather Orsted; Hiromi Sanada; Geoff Sussman
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 3.315

2.  Comparison of bacteria-retaining ability of absorbent wound dressings.

Authors:  Masahiro Tachi; Shinichi Hirabayashi; Yoshiyuki Yonehara; Yasutoshi Suzuki; Philip Bowler
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 3.315

3.  Topical silver-impregnated dressings and the importance of the dressing technology.

Authors:  Keith Cutting; Richard White; Hans Hoekstra
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 3.315

4.  Evaluation of Absorbent Versus Conventional Wound Dressing.

Authors:  Jan Bredow; Katharina Hoffmann; Johannes Oppermann; Martin Hellmich; Peer Eysel; Kourosh Zarghooni
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2018-03-30       Impact factor: 5.594

5.  Testing wound dressings using an in vitro wound model.

Authors:  C Lipp; K Kirker; A Agostinho; G James; P Stewart
Journal:  J Wound Care       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.072

6.  The effect of a silver-containing Hydrofiber dressing on superficial wound bed and bacterial balance of chronic wounds.

Authors:  Pat Coutts; R Gary Sibbald
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 3.315

7.  A prospective, randomised, controlled trial comparing wound dressings used in hip and knee surgery: Aquacel and Tegaderm versus Cutiplast.

Authors:  M J Ravenscroft; J Harker; K A Buch
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 1.891

8.  A novel composite membrane of chitosan-carboxymethyl cellulose polyelectrolyte complex membrane filled with nano-hydroxyapatite I. Preparation and properties.

Authors:  Jiang Liuyun; Li Yubao; Xiong Chengdong
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2009-03-20       Impact factor: 3.896

9.  Bone formation in a rat tibial defect model using carboxymethyl cellulose/BioC/bone morphogenic protein-2 hybrid materials.

Authors:  Sang-Heon Song; Young-Pil Yun; Hak-Jun Kim; Kyeongsoon Park; Sung Eun Kim; Hae-Ryong Song
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-04-06       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 10.  Current therapies in treatment and prevention of fracture wound biofilms: why a multifaceted approach is essential for resolving persistent infections.

Authors:  Krystle A Blanchette; Joseph C Wenke
Journal:  J Bone Jt Infect       Date:  2018-04-12
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.