| Literature DB >> 34729012 |
Samoraphop Banharak1, Ladawan Panpanit1, Suttinan Subindee1, Patcharawan Narongsanoi2, Panisara Sanun-Aur3, Walaiporn Kulwong4, Pachareeporn Songtin5, Wanida Khemphimai6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The prevalent rate of incontinence-associated dermatitis (IAD) trends upward in older populations. Skin breakdown from IAD impacts the quality of life of older adults and reflects the quality of care in hospitals and long-term care facilities. Specific and appropriate interventions for prevention and care are needed. This systematic review aims to review optimal strategies for prevention and care for older adults with IAD.Entities:
Keywords: incontinence-associated dermatitis; moisture-associated skin damage; older adults; skin barrier function; skin breakdown; systematic review
Year: 2021 PMID: 34729012 PMCID: PMC8556723 DOI: 10.2147/JMDH.S329672
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Multidiscip Healthc ISSN: 1178-2390
Figure 1Diagram for group assignment and independent review.
Figure 2Flow chart of the review process and results.
Critical Appraisal of the Selected Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs)
| JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Randomized Controlled Trials* | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Studies/Total Score | Was true Randomization Used for Assignment of Participants to Treatment Groups? | Was Allocation to Treatment Groups Concealed? | Were Treatment Groups Similar at the Baseline? | Were Participants Blind to Treatment Assignment? | Were those Delivering Treatment Blind to Treatment Assignment? | Were Outcomes Assessors Blind to Treatment Assignment? | Were Treatment Groups Treated Identically Other Than the Intervention of Interest? | Was follow up Complete and if Not, were Differences Between Groups in Terms of their Follow up Adequately Described and Analyzed? | Were Participants Analyzed in the Groups to Which They were Randomized? | Were Outcomes Measured in the Same Way for Treatment Groups? | Were Outcomes Measured in a Reliable Way? | Was Appropriate Statistical Analysis Used? | Was the Trial Design Appropriate, and Any Deviations From the Standard Rct Design (Individual Randomization, Parallel Groups) Accounted for in the Conduct and Analysis of the Trial? |
| Sugama et al (2012)/(10/13) | Y | Y | Y | Y | U | U | U | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
| Kon et al (2017)/(9/13) | Y | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | U |
Notes: *Checklist reproduced from: Tufanaru C, Munn Z, Aromataris E, Campbell J, Hopp L. Chapter 3: Systematic reviews of effectiveness. In: Aromataris E, Munn Z, editors. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI; 2020. Available from: 20.
Abbreviations: Y, yes; N, no; U, unclear.
Critical Appraisal of the Selected Systematic Reviews
| JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses* | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Studies/Total Score | Is the Review Question Clearly and Explicitly Stated? | Were the Inclusion Criteria Appropriate for the Review Question? | Was the Search Strategy Appropriate? | Were the Sources and Resources Used to Search For Studies Adequate? | Were the Criteria for Appraising Studies Appropriate? | Was Critical Appraisal Conducted by Two or More Reviewers Independently? | Were There Methods to Minimize Errors in Data Extraction? | Were the Methods Used to Combine Studies Appropriate? | Was the Likelihood of Publication Bias Assessed? | Were Recommendations For Policy and/or Practice Supported by the Reported Data? | Were the Specific Directives for New Research Appropriate? |
| Corcoran & Woodward. (2013)/(7/11) | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | U | U | U | N | Y | Y |
Notes: *Checklist reproduced from: Aromataris E, Fernandez R, Godfrey C, Holly C, Kahlil H, Tungpunkom P. Summarizing systematic reviews: Methodological development, conduct and reporting of an Umbrella review approach. International Journal of Evidence Based Healthcare. 2015;13(3):132–140. .19 Copyright © 2015, International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare © 2015 The Joanna Briggs Institute.
Abbreviations: Y, yes; N, no; U, unclear.
Critical Appraisal of the Selected Reviews (Text and Opinion Papers)
| JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Text and Opinion Papers* | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Studies/Total Score | Is the Source of the Opinion Clearly Identified? | Does the Source of Opinion Have Standing in the Field of Expertise? | Are the Interests of the Relevant Population the Central Focus of the Opinion? | Is the Stated Position the Result of an Analytical Process, and is There Logic in the Opinion Expressed? | Is There Reference to the Extant Literature? | Is Any Incongruence with the Literature/Sources Logically Defended? |
| Kliangprom & Putivanit (2017)/(5/6) | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N |
| Iamma, W. (2017)/(4/6) | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N |
| Yates A. (2018a)/(5/6) | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N |
| Yates A. (2018b)/(5/6) | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N |
| Lumbers M. (2019)/(5/6) | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N |
| Holloway, S. (2019)/(5/6) | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N |
Notes: *Checklist reproduced from: McArthur A, Klugarova J, Yan H, Florescu S. Innovations in the systematic review of text and opinion. International Journal of Evidence Based Healthcare. 2015;13(3):188–195. .21 Copyright © 2015, International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare © 2015 The Joanna Briggs Institute.
Abbreviations: Y, yes; N, no; U, unclear.
Critical Appraisal of the Selected Case Reports
| JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Case Reports* | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Studies/Total Score | Were Patient’s Demographic Characteristics Clearly Described? | Was the Patient’s History Clearly Described and Presented as a Timeline? | Was the Current Clinical Condition of the Patient on Presentation Clearly Described? | Were Diagnostic Tests or Assessment Methods and the Results Clearly Described? | Was the Intervention(s) or Treatment Procedure(s) Clearly Described? | Was the Post-Intervention Clinical Condition Clearly Described? | Were Adverse Events (Harms) or Unanticipated Events Identified and Described? | Does the Case Report Provide Takeaway Lessons? |
| Beldon, P. (2012)/(5/8) | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N |
| Parnham, Copson, and Loban (2020)/(6/8) | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N |
Notes: *Checklist reproduced from: Moola S., Munn Z, Tufanaru C et al. Chapter 7: Systematic reviews of etiology and risk. In: Aromataris E, Munn Z, editors. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI; 2020. Available from: 22
Abbreviations: Y, yes; N, no; U, unclear.
Quality Assessment Results of the Selected Studies
| Quality Assessment of the Evidence by GRADE Guideline* | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. | a Risk of Bias (Limitation of Study Design, Confounding Factors, Missing Data, Adherence Measurement) | b Precision (Methodology, Statistical Certainty, Amount of Information on A Certain Factor How Precisely an Object of Study is Measured) | c Directness (Extent to Which the People, Interventions, and Outcome Measures are Similar to Those of Interest, Confident Results Come From the Direct Evidence) | d Consistency (Relevant Measurement Application Where Several Items that Propose to Measure the Same General Construct Produce Similar Scores, no Overlapping and Missing, Statistical Significance) | Certainty of Evidence | |||||
| Low | Unclear | High | Precise | Imprecise | Direct | Indirect | Consistent | Inconsistent | ||
| Beldon, P. (2012) | √ | √ | √ | √ | Low | |||||
| Sugama et al. (2012) | √ | √ | √ | √ | Moderate | |||||
| Kon et al. (2017) | √ | √ | √ | √ | Moderate | |||||
| Parnham, Copson, and Loban (2020) | √ | √ | √ | √ | Low | |||||
Notes: aRisk of bias; bPrecision; cDirectness; dConsistency. *GRADE guideline reproduced from: Schünemann H, Brożek J, Guyatt G, Oxman A, editors. GRADE Handbook. 2013. Available from: . Retrieved June 4, 2021.23 © 2013 - The GRADE Working Group.
A Summary of the Reviewed Studies About Prevention and Care Among Older Adults with Incontinence-Associated Dermatitis (IAD)
| Authors | Type of Article and Design | Settings | Level, Certainty of Evidence and Methodological Quality | Sample Size | Prevention, Care, and Outcomes | Research Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beldon, P. (2012) | Mixed: Literature review and cases report | United Kingdom (In-patient department) | Level 4.d Lowbd (5/8) | 3 mixed sex | 1. Assessment and management of the causes of incontinence. | 1. An intervention with products used for prevention and care of IAD, a flow chart or step by step guideline is not provided. |
| Sugama et al. (2012) | Research Article: RCT | Japan (Geriatric medical hospital) | Level 1.c Moderatea (10/13) | 60 female | 1. To prevent IAD, the researchers developed an improved apertured film plus feminine pad to decrease inflammation caused by incontinence. This special design was the dry-feel Attends Incontinence Care Pad with frontal absorbent material on a pad 23 cm. wide. The pad was designed to absorb urine in the frontal area by using a combination of absorbent polymer and pulp only to minimized exposure of the buttocks to urine, while a second sheet is embedded between the top sheet and the absorbent material to prevent the absorbed urine from flowing back to the pad surface and buttocks area. In addition, the slit in the urinary excretion point and the flexed convex surface of the pad fit in the perineal region, also preventing leakage to the buttock area. This pad improved frontal absorption and backflow as compared with conventional products. The number of patients recovered completely from IAD in the experimental group (13 patients) than in the control group (4 patients). The time of recovery in experimental group was significantly faster than control group. However, moisture content and skin pH were similar in both groups. | 1. The experimental group wore the hospital standard pad and a diaper during the night (20:00–9:00) because the volume of the test pad was not adequate for changing the incontinence pad during the night in the test hospital. The control group wore the standard pad and diaper at all times. This may affect research findings because experimental group wore mixed styles of pad. If health care professionals expect the same results in practice, they should apply the same procedure used in the study. Wearing the test pad for 24 hours needs to be explored in future study. |
| Corcoran & Woodward. (2013) | Research Article: Integrative review | Multiple settings (Long term care and in-patient department) | Level 3.b-(7/11) | 6 studies (1618 mixed sex) | 1. The products to prevent and treat IAD were the following: barrier film for 14 days, zinc oxide oil for 14 days, skin cleanser, barrier cream, Cavilon barrier film 3 times a week, 12% zinc oxide after each incontinent episode, 1% dimethicone after each incontinent episode, 43% petrolatum after each incontinent episode, 98% petrolatum after each incontinent episode, a non-aqueous product, a petrolatum containing water in oil, a petrolatum containing oil-in-water, two zinc-oxide-based products, glycerin, a moisturizer containing lanolin, a fine-grain emulsion of 50% lanolin, beeswax and petrolatum, Cavilon barrier film 3 times a day, and a petrolatum ointments as needed. | 1. Studies showed that using the barrier as part of a skin care protocol can help to prevent and/or treat IAD; however, there is insufficient evidence to recommend any one barrier product for use in a standard skin care protocol for IAD. |
| Kliangprom & Putivanit (2017) | Academic Article: Literature review | Thailand | Level 5.c-(5/6) | - | 1. Assessment and reassessment (no identification when and how often to assess) | This is a literature review that did not provide systematic search methods. Articles may not represent all studies with older adults. Details for caring for IAD were not given, such as what were the recommend products, how to apply the products, the quantity to apply, the frequency to apply, and when to apply? An outcome evaluation to identify the effectiveness of IAD care was not provided. |
| Iamma, W. (2017) | Academic article (miscellaneous): Literature review | Thailand | Level 5.c-(4/6) | - | 1. Observe and manage cause of incontinence, such as evacuation and urinary catheterization. | 1. Missing was how the product was to be applied, the quantity to apply, and the frequency to apply. |
| Kon et al. (2017) | Research article: RCT | Japan (Long term care) | Level 1.c Moderateb (9/13) | 33 female | 1. Intervention group received skin cleansing with wet towels at each pad change, moisturizing and protective skin cleanser (including polyquaternium-51, an emollient and copolymer; and dimethicone were applied once a day); moisturizing (skin cream under investigation was applied three times daily and after product changes); and skin protectant (3M Cavilon Skin Barrier Cream was applied three times daily) for 14 days. The control group received only cleansing with wet towels at each pad change, moisturizing, and protective skin cleanser, including polyquaternium-51, an emollient and copolymer, and dimethicone once a day for 14 days. | The study had a small sample size (33 instead of 133 from sample calculation), included females only, and had a short time evaluation period. This study included patients with mild IAD (inflammation only without skin loss or cutaneous rash). Thus, the findings may not be generalizable to older women with higher severity of IAD. However, the study controlled for confounding factors, such as temperature (controlled at 20–26 degree Celsius) and relative humidity (35–52%) at studied settings. |
| Yates, A. (2018a) | Academic article: Literature review | United Kingdom | Level 5.c-(5/6) | - | 1. Screening: Incontinence assessment, IAD risk assessment, and skin damaging assessment (if skin is already damaged) should be performed. | This review provided specific care for older adults. However, the author did not state the process used to comprehensively search to confirm that all relevant articles were included before making a conclusion. Moreover, the recommendation missed some specific details, such as the quantity of the product to apply, the frequency of application, and when to apply the product. Finally, the author provided only interventions or products to deal with IAD but did not indicate when results would be noticed after applying the interventions and products and how to evaluate the outcomes. |
| Yates, A. (2018b) | Academic article: Literature review | United Kingdom | Level 5.c-(5/6) | - | 1. Prevention of skin problems: Incontinence assessment, IAD risk assessment, and grade of damage should be conducted if IAD has already occurred. Avoidance of IAD should be the first priority. This should include routine continence and skin assessment, appropriate containment, and implementation of an IAD management system. | This academic article provided few concepts of taking care of IAD in older adults. More information is needed, such as names of the recommended products and how to apply and when we can use the product. The health care professional will find it is difficult to apply knowledge from this article. |
| Lumbers, M. (2019) | Academic article: Literature review | United Kingdom | Level 5.c-(5/6) | - | 1. Clean: Skin following an episode of incontinence should be cleaned and dried carefully as soon after the event as possible. Maintaining a pH of 5.5 and ensuring a slightly acidic mantle to discourage bacteria colonization while removing any debris are important. | This academic article provided the concepts of taking care of a patient with IAD. However, few details are provided. The article presents concepts, but the practitioner needs more concrete guidelines in caring for patients with IAD. |
| Holloway, S. (2019) | Academic article: Literature review | United Kingdom | Level 5.c-(5/6) | - | 1. Structured skin care regimen included: Remove irritant from the skin and protect from further exposure. Use devices or products that wick moisture away from the affected area or the skin that is at risk. Cleanse perineal skin after each episode of incontinence with a cleanser/wipe that has a pH close to 5.5 Use disposable wash basins for cleansing the skin to reduce cross infection risk. Check closely in skin folds for residual feces and urine. Remove these irritants after each episode of incontinence. Moisturize and protect using skin barrier products. Educate all care providers on the preferred methods of skin care. | The author provided only concepts of taking care of IAD, with few details. The concepts would be difficult to implement in practice because skin care, cleaning procedures, and barrier products to take care of IAD were not given. More information is need about the quantity of the products to be applied, when to apply the product, how long to clean up after each episode of incontinence, and the frequency of application. |
| Parnham, Copson, and Loban (2020) | Research Article: Cases report | United Kingdom (In-patient department) | Level 4.d Lowbd (6/8) | 3 female | 1. Assessment: Three assessment tools were provided, including IAD severity instrument which gives a severity score, anatomical location, and range of photographs: Ghent Global IAD Categorization tool and this similar to The classification system issued by the European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, National Pressure Injury Advisory Panel, and Pan Pacific Pressure Injury Alliance that cause confusion when documenting the extent of skin damage; and Skin Moisture Alert Reporting Tool which is highly recommended for use. Skin cleansing should be applied after each episode of incontinence. Soap, water, cloths, and towels should be avoided since they can cause high pH, dry skin, and skin damage from shear forces. No-rinse cleansers such as pH-balance soap and spray foam should be applied. Barrier protection: The protection forms can be creams, films, and ointments. They are water repellent and commonly contain petrolatum, zinc oxide, or dimethicone. However, films were strongly recommended since its advantages are drying quickly on the skin surface and reducing the risk of skin tripping on dressing removal. The three IAD cases were treated by using the Medi Derma-Pro Foam and Spray Incontinence Cleanser with the soft, disposable wipe. The areas were allowed to air dry. A thin coating of Medi Derma-Pro Skin Protectant Ointment was applied over the affected area and repeated after every episode of incontinence. Healing was noticeable in the 2nd, 4th, and 7th week. | 1. Only concepts were presented but a product’s name was reported in three case studies. |
Notes: The scores of Methodological Quality of the Studies are shown in fractions based on Joanna Briggs Institute and the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tools.