Literature DB >> 3533007

Pressure ulcer management in home health care: efficacy and cost effectiveness of moisture vapor permeable dressing.

M D Sebern.   

Abstract

This prospective randomized study was conducted in the home care setting to compare healing rates and costs of two different dressings for pressure ulcers: the gauze and tape dressing and the transparent moisture vapor permeable dressing (MVP). Demographic variables, healing rates, and cost of treatment were statistically analyzed for 77 pressure ulcers (48 patients). Each wound was randomly assigned to either a gauze dressing or a MVP dressing. Initial ulcer grade (Shea criteria) and measurements were determined at the start of treatment and weekly for an eight-week period. Photographs of the wound were taken at the beginning and end of treatment. The same protocol for irrigating the wound and relieving pressure was followed for both dressing groups. The median improvement for the grade II group was 100% for the MVP (n = 22) and 52% for gauze (n = 12), p less than 0.05 (Wilcoxon rank sum test). The healing rates for grade III ulcers were not significantly different in the two dressing groups. The mean (eight-week) labor and supply cost per ulcer using the MVP was $845, while that for gauze treatments was $1359, p less than 0.05 (Wilcoxon rank sum test). The cost difference for grade III ulcers was not significant in the two dressing groups. The MVP improved the healing rate and was more cost effective for grade II ulcers. Both gauze and MVP dressings proved effective for the treatment of grade III ulcers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1986        PMID: 3533007     DOI: 10.1016/0003-9993(86)90004-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil        ISSN: 0003-9993            Impact factor:   3.966


  8 in total

Review 1.  Dressings and topical agents for treating pressure ulcers.

Authors:  Maggie J Westby; Jo C Dumville; Marta O Soares; Nikki Stubbs; Gill Norman
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-06-22

Review 2.  Pressure sores in the elderly: can this outcome be improved?

Authors:  D M Smith; D K Winsemius; R W Besdine
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1991 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Practical Management of Pressure Sores: Taking the patient's overall health into account.

Authors:  J M Jordan
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 3.275

4.  Management of chronic pressure ulcers: an evidence-based analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2009-07-01

Review 5.  Interventions for pressure ulcers: a summary of evidence for prevention and treatment.

Authors:  Ross A Atkinson; Nicky A Cullum
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2018-01-25       Impact factor: 2.772

6.  A comparison of diabetic foot ulcer outcomes using negative pressure wound therapy versus historical standard of care.

Authors:  Lawrence A Lavery; Andrew J Boulton; Jeffrey A Niezgoda; Peter Sheehan
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 3.315

Review 7.  A systematic review of cost-effectiveness analyses of complex wound interventions reveals optimal treatments for specific wound types.

Authors:  Andrea C Tricco; Elise Cogo; Wanrudee Isaranuwatchai; Paul A Khan; Geetha Sanmugalingham; Jesmin Antony; Jeffrey S Hoch; Sharon E Straus
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2015-04-22       Impact factor: 8.775

Review 8.  Selection of Appropriate Wound Dressing for Various Wounds.

Authors:  Chenyu Shi; Chenyu Wang; He Liu; Qiuju Li; Ronghang Li; Yan Zhang; Yuzhe Liu; Ying Shao; Jincheng Wang
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2020-03-19
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.