OUTCOME OF FOAM VERSUS GAUZE DRESSINGS IN NEGATIVE PRESSURE WOUND THERAPY FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF ACUTE TRAUMATIC WOUNDS WITH SOFT TISSUE LOSS AT KENYATTA NATIONAL HOSPITAL.

Q4 Medicine
JG Ondieki, S. Khainga, F. Owilla, F. Nangole
{"title":"OUTCOME OF FOAM VERSUS GAUZE DRESSINGS IN NEGATIVE PRESSURE WOUND THERAPY FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF ACUTE TRAUMATIC WOUNDS WITH SOFT TISSUE LOSS AT KENYATTA NATIONAL HOSPITAL.","authors":"JG Ondieki, S. Khainga, F. Owilla, F. Nangole","doi":"10.4314/EAMJ.V89I7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND Wounds have provided a challenge to the clinicians for centuries and this scenario persists to the 21st century. Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is one of the latest additions in wound management. It has been widely adopted in developed countries with foam as the default wound dressing although it has some limitations. OBJECTIVE To determine the difference in outcomes between the use of gauze versus foam as wound dressing in NPWT for the management of acute traumatic wounds with soft tissue loss. DESIGN Prospective randomised comparative interventional study. SETTING Kenyatta National Hospital Orthopaedic and Surgical wards. SUBJECTS All patients aged above 12 years with Class III and Class IV acute traumatic wounds. OUTCOME MEASURES The main outcome measure is the time taken to achieve 100% wound granulation. Comparisons were also made on the mean pain scores during dressing change and the percentage change in wound surface area. RESULTS Wounds took an average of 8.4 days in the gauze group and 8.1 days in the foam group (p = 0.698) to achieve full granulation. The percentage change in wound surface area was 5.3 versus 5.5 (P = 0.769) in the gauze and foam groups respectively. The infection rates were comparable between the two groups (28% for gauze and 23.1% for foam, p = 0.697) and there was no significant difference in the median pain scores (gauze = 4.5, foam = 4.8 with p = 0.174). However, outcomes with gauze dressing were influenced significantly by the time to application of NPWT, initial wound surface area and wound infection while with foam dressing outcomes tended to be affected less so by the above factors. CONCLUSION In the use of NPWT for the management of acute traumatic wounds, there is no difference in terms of time to full wound granulation, change in wound surface area, wound infection and pain during dressing change whether gauze or foam is used as the wound dressing material.","PeriodicalId":11399,"journal":{"name":"East African medical journal","volume":"89 7 1","pages":"230-40"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"East African medical journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/EAMJ.V89I7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

BACKGROUND Wounds have provided a challenge to the clinicians for centuries and this scenario persists to the 21st century. Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is one of the latest additions in wound management. It has been widely adopted in developed countries with foam as the default wound dressing although it has some limitations. OBJECTIVE To determine the difference in outcomes between the use of gauze versus foam as wound dressing in NPWT for the management of acute traumatic wounds with soft tissue loss. DESIGN Prospective randomised comparative interventional study. SETTING Kenyatta National Hospital Orthopaedic and Surgical wards. SUBJECTS All patients aged above 12 years with Class III and Class IV acute traumatic wounds. OUTCOME MEASURES The main outcome measure is the time taken to achieve 100% wound granulation. Comparisons were also made on the mean pain scores during dressing change and the percentage change in wound surface area. RESULTS Wounds took an average of 8.4 days in the gauze group and 8.1 days in the foam group (p = 0.698) to achieve full granulation. The percentage change in wound surface area was 5.3 versus 5.5 (P = 0.769) in the gauze and foam groups respectively. The infection rates were comparable between the two groups (28% for gauze and 23.1% for foam, p = 0.697) and there was no significant difference in the median pain scores (gauze = 4.5, foam = 4.8 with p = 0.174). However, outcomes with gauze dressing were influenced significantly by the time to application of NPWT, initial wound surface area and wound infection while with foam dressing outcomes tended to be affected less so by the above factors. CONCLUSION In the use of NPWT for the management of acute traumatic wounds, there is no difference in terms of time to full wound granulation, change in wound surface area, wound infection and pain during dressing change whether gauze or foam is used as the wound dressing material.
泡沫与纱布敷料负压伤口治疗在肯雅塔国家医院处理急性创伤性软组织丢失的效果。
几个世纪以来,伤口一直是临床医生面临的一个挑战,这种情况一直持续到21世纪。负压创面治疗(NPWT)是一种最新的创面治疗方法。虽然它有一定的局限性,但已被发达国家广泛采用,泡沫作为默认的伤口敷料。目的探讨纱布与泡沫敷料在NPWT急性创伤性软组织缺损治疗中的效果差异。前瞻性随机对照介入研究。肯雅塔国家医院骨科和外科病房设置。研究对象:所有年龄大于12岁的III类和IV类急性创伤患者。主要观察指标是伤口达到100%肉芽化所需的时间。比较换药时的平均疼痛评分和创面面积变化百分比。结果纱布组平均耗时8.4 d,泡沫组平均耗时8.1 d (p = 0.698)达到完全造粒;纱布组和泡沫组创面面积变化百分比分别为5.3和5.5 (P = 0.769)。两组患者感染率相当(纱布组28%,泡沫组23.1%,p = 0.697),疼痛中位评分差异无统计学意义(纱布组4.5分,泡沫组4.8分,p = 0.174)。NPWT应用时间、创面初始面积和创面感染对纱布敷料的疗效有显著影响,而泡沫敷料对上述因素的影响较小。结论应用NPWT治疗急性创伤性创面,不论是纱布还是泡沫作为创面敷料,在创面满肉芽化时间、创面面积变化、创面感染及换药时疼痛等方面均无差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
East African medical journal
East African medical journal Medicine-Medicine (all)
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The East African Medical Journal is published every month. It is intended for publication of papers on original work and reviews of all aspects of medicine. Communications bearing on clinical and basic research on problems relevant to East Africa and other African countries will receive special attention. Papers submitted for publication are accepted only on the understanding they will not be published elsewhere without the permission of the Editor-in-Chief
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信