Literature DB >> 26885012

Comparison of the treatment of hydrocolloid and saline gauze for pressure ulcer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Xuemei Zheng1, Jieqiong Li1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the hydrocolloid dressing versus saline gauze for the treatment of pressure ulcer.
METHODS: Pubmed and Web of Knowledge were searched for randomized controlled trials for the treatment of hydrocolloid and saline gauze for pressure ulcer. The random effect model was used. Sensitivity analysis and publication bias were conducted.
RESULTS: Seven randomized controlled trials involving a total of 329 participants were included in this meta-analysis. The combined results suggested that significant association in complete healing were detected among hydrocolloid dressings and saline gauze [Summary RR=2.20, 95% CI=1.21-4.02, I(2)=48.5%]. The associations were also significant when we only combine the results for ulcers healed and the treatment duration of 8-12 weeks. No publication bias was found.
CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis suggested that the use of hydrocolloid dressing increased the likelihood of complete healing by more than two-fold compared with saline gauze dressing.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Hydrocolloid; meta-analysis; pressure ulcer; saline gauze

Year:  2015        PMID: 26885012      PMCID: PMC4723857     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med        ISSN: 1940-5901


  20 in total

1.  Controlling the risk of spurious findings from meta-regression.

Authors:  Julian P T Higgins; Simon G Thompson
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2004-06-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Meta-analysis of genetic association studies.

Authors:  Marcus R Munafò; Jonathan Flint
Journal:  Trends Genet       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 11.639

3.  Hydrocolloid versus saline-gauze dressings in treating pressure ulcers: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  G C Xakellis; E A Chrischilles
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 3.966

4.  Pressure ulcer stages revised by the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ostomy Wound Manage       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.629

5.  Meta-analysis in clinical trials.

Authors:  R DerSimonian; N Laird
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1986-09

6.  Pressure ulcers--randomised controlled trial comparing hydrocolloid and saline gauze dressings.

Authors:  K W Chang; S Alsagoff; K T Ong; P H Sim
Journal:  Med J Malaysia       Date:  1998-12

7.  A comparison of the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of two methods of managing pressure ulcers.

Authors:  J C Colwell; M D Foreman; J P Trotter
Journal:  Decubitus       Date:  1993-07

8.  Efficacy of hydrocolloid occlusive dressing technique in decubitus ulcer treatment: a comparative study.

Authors:  Y C Kim; J C Shin; C I Park; S H Oh; S M Choi; Y S Kim
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 2.759

9.  Effect of three wound dressings on infection, healing comfort, and cost in patients with sternotomy wounds: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Rochelle Wynne; Mari Botti; Hilary Stedman; Lynda Holsworth; Maria Harinos; Olivia Flavell; Christianne Manterfield
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 9.410

10.  A randomized clinical trial comparing hydrocolloid, phenytoin and simple dressings for the treatment of pressure ulcers [ISRCTN33429693].

Authors:  Mohammad Taghi Hollisaz; Hossein Khedmat; Fatemeh Yari
Journal:  BMC Dermatol       Date:  2004-12-15
View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Review of the Current Management of Pressure Ulcers.

Authors:  Tatiana V Boyko; Michael T Longaker; George P Yang
Journal:  Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle)       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 4.730

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.