Literature DB >> 29669676

Evaluation of Absorbent Versus Conventional Wound Dressing.

Jan Bredow1, Katharina Hoffmann, Johannes Oppermann, Martin Hellmich, Peer Eysel, Kourosh Zarghooni.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Lower-limb endoprosthetic operations and spinal operations are among the more common types of orthopedic procedures. Postoperative woundhealing disturbances and infections can lead to longer periods of hospital stay and recovery as well as to higher morbidity and mortality.
METHODS: 209 patients who had been judged to have an indication for a primary knee or hip endoprosthesis or for a primary spinal operation were included in this randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01988818) over the period June 2014- February 2015. After randomization, patients in the intervention group were given a trial dressing (Mepilex-Border Post-Op) and those in the control group were given a conventional adhesive dressing (Cosmopor). The primary endpoint was blister formation.
RESULTS: In the overall study population, only a single case of blister formation was seen. The affected patient belonged to the intervention group but was mistakenly given a control dressing and developed blisters on the 6th day after surgery. Dressings were changed less frequently in the intervention group, and this difference was statistically significant (p<0.001). The patients, nurses, and physicians all expressed greater satisfaction with the trial dressings than with the control dressings (p<0.001).
CONCLUSION: The intervention group did not differ from the control group with respect to the primary endpoint, postoperative blister formation. The patients, nurses, and physicians all judged the dressing used in the intervention group more favorably than the conventional dressing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29669676      PMCID: PMC5938433          DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.2018.0213

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int        ISSN: 1866-0452            Impact factor:   5.594


  39 in total

1.  Infection after total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  R J Grimer; A Abudu
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2005-04

2.  Failed hip replacements.

Authors:  R N Villar
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1992-01-04

Review 3.  Evidence review: the clinical benefits of Safetac technology in wound care.

Authors:  Phil Davies; Mark Rippon
Journal:  J Wound Care       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 2.072

Review 4.  A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review Evaluating Skin Closure After Total Knee Arthroplasty-What Is the Best Method?

Authors:  Kelvin Y Kim; Afshin A Anoushiravani; William J Long; Jonathan M Vigdorchik; Ivan Fernandez-Madrid; Ran Schwarzkopf
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2017-04-12       Impact factor: 4.757

Review 5.  A review of blisters caused by wound dressing components: Can they impede post-operative rehabilitation and discharge?

Authors:  Sara Eastburn; Karen Ousey; Mark G Rippon
Journal:  Int J Orthop Trauma Nurs       Date:  2015-08-17

6.  Infection after total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  A W Blom; J Brown; A H Taylor; G Pattison; S Whitehouse; G C Bannister
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2004-07

Review 7.  Dressings for the prevention of surgical site infection.

Authors:  Jo C Dumville; Trish A Gray; Catherine J Walter; Catherine A Sharp; Tamara Page
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2014-09-01

8.  Incidence of surgical site infection after spine surgery: what is the impact of the definition of infection?

Authors:  Sjoerd P F T Nota; Yvonne Braun; David Ring; Joseph H Schwab
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  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

10.  Postoperative washing of sutured wounds.

Authors:  Conrad Harrison; Cian Wade; Sinclair Gore
Journal:  Ann Med Surg (Lond)       Date:  2016-09-02
View more
  5 in total

1.  Consider the Adhesives of Wound Dressings.

Authors:  Joachim Dissemond
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2018-06-22       Impact factor: 5.594

2.  Lukewarm Tap Water.

Authors:  Matthias J Wenderlein
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2018-06-22       Impact factor: 5.594

3.  In Reply.

Authors:  Jan Bredow
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2018-06-22       Impact factor: 5.594

4.  Towards Simpler and Reliable Wound Care.

Authors:  Wolf O Bechstein
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2018-03-30       Impact factor: 5.594

5.  Could intermittent change of conventional dressing affect risk of periprosthetic joint infection after primary total joint arthroplasty?

Authors:  Orkhan Aliyev; Aghamazahir Aghazada; Cemil Burak Demirkıran; Gökçer Uzer; Mustafa Citak; İbrahim Tuncay; Fatih Yıldız
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-07-11       Impact factor: 3.067

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.