Lucia Michailidis, Shan M Bergin, Terry P Haines, Cylie M Williams
{"title":"比较低频超声与非手术尖锐清创对慢性糖尿病相关足溃疡治愈率影响的系统综述。","authors":"Lucia Michailidis, Shan M Bergin, Terry P Haines, Cylie M Williams","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Management of diabetes-related foot ulcers often involves debridement of devitalized tissue, but evidence regarding the most effective debridement method is limited.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>A systematic review was conducted to determine the effectiveness of nonsurgical sharp debridement (NSSD) versus low-frequency ultrasonic debridement (LFUD) for diabetes-related foot ulceration in adults.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Published studies (earliest date available to April 2017) comparing healing outcomes of LFUD- and NSSD-treated foot ulcers in adults were considered. The quality of publications that met inclusion criteria were assessed using the PEDro scale, and a meta-analysis was undertaken to compare percentage healed and percentage of ulcer size reduction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 259 publications identified, 4 met the inclusion criteria but 2 of the 4 did not contain sufficient patient outcomes details for meta-analysis, leaving a sample size of 173 patients. Outcome data for the 2 studies included percentage of ulcers healed between the 2 debridement methods. This difference was not significant (RR = 0.92; 95% CI = 0.76-1.11). The risk of bias for both studies was low.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>No difference in healing outcomes between NSSD and LFUD debridement of diabetic foot ulcers was found. Well-designed, controlled clinical studies are needed to address the current paucity of studies examining the efficacy and comparative effectiveness of debridement methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":54656,"journal":{"name":"Ostomy Wound Management","volume":"64 9","pages":"39-46"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Systematic Review to Compare the Effect of Low-frequency Ultrasonic Versus Nonsurgical Sharp Debridement on the Healing Rate of Chronic Diabetes-related Foot Ulcers.\",\"authors\":\"Lucia Michailidis, Shan M Bergin, Terry P Haines, Cylie M Williams\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Management of diabetes-related foot ulcers often involves debridement of devitalized tissue, but evidence regarding the most effective debridement method is limited.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>A systematic review was conducted to determine the effectiveness of nonsurgical sharp debridement (NSSD) versus low-frequency ultrasonic debridement (LFUD) for diabetes-related foot ulceration in adults.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Published studies (earliest date available to April 2017) comparing healing outcomes of LFUD- and NSSD-treated foot ulcers in adults were considered. The quality of publications that met inclusion criteria were assessed using the PEDro scale, and a meta-analysis was undertaken to compare percentage healed and percentage of ulcer size reduction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 259 publications identified, 4 met the inclusion criteria but 2 of the 4 did not contain sufficient patient outcomes details for meta-analysis, leaving a sample size of 173 patients. Outcome data for the 2 studies included percentage of ulcers healed between the 2 debridement methods. This difference was not significant (RR = 0.92; 95% CI = 0.76-1.11). The risk of bias for both studies was low.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>No difference in healing outcomes between NSSD and LFUD debridement of diabetic foot ulcers was found. Well-designed, controlled clinical studies are needed to address the current paucity of studies examining the efficacy and comparative effectiveness of debridement methods.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54656,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ostomy Wound Management\",\"volume\":\"64 9\",\"pages\":\"39-46\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ostomy Wound Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Nursing\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ostomy Wound Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
糖尿病相关足溃疡的治疗通常涉及对失活组织进行清创,但关于最有效的清创方法的证据有限。目的:进行了一项系统评价,以确定非手术尖锐清创(NSSD)与低频超声清创(LFUD)治疗成人糖尿病相关足部溃疡的有效性。方法:考虑已发表的研究(最早可获得日期为2017年4月),比较LFUD和nssd治疗的成人足溃疡的愈合结果。使用PEDro量表评估符合纳入标准的出版物的质量,并进行荟萃分析以比较愈合百分比和溃疡大小缩小百分比。结果:在确定的259篇出版物中,4篇符合纳入标准,但其中2篇没有包含足够的患者结局细节进行meta分析,因此样本量为173例患者。这两项研究的结局数据包括两种清创方法之间溃疡愈合的百分比。这一差异不显著(RR = 0.92;95% ci = 0.76-1.11)。两项研究的偏倚风险都很低。结论:非ssd清创与LFUD清创对糖尿病足溃疡的愈合效果无显著差异。需要精心设计的对照临床研究来解决目前研究清创方法的疗效和比较效果的缺乏。
A Systematic Review to Compare the Effect of Low-frequency Ultrasonic Versus Nonsurgical Sharp Debridement on the Healing Rate of Chronic Diabetes-related Foot Ulcers.
Management of diabetes-related foot ulcers often involves debridement of devitalized tissue, but evidence regarding the most effective debridement method is limited.
Purpose: A systematic review was conducted to determine the effectiveness of nonsurgical sharp debridement (NSSD) versus low-frequency ultrasonic debridement (LFUD) for diabetes-related foot ulceration in adults.
Method: Published studies (earliest date available to April 2017) comparing healing outcomes of LFUD- and NSSD-treated foot ulcers in adults were considered. The quality of publications that met inclusion criteria were assessed using the PEDro scale, and a meta-analysis was undertaken to compare percentage healed and percentage of ulcer size reduction.
Results: Of the 259 publications identified, 4 met the inclusion criteria but 2 of the 4 did not contain sufficient patient outcomes details for meta-analysis, leaving a sample size of 173 patients. Outcome data for the 2 studies included percentage of ulcers healed between the 2 debridement methods. This difference was not significant (RR = 0.92; 95% CI = 0.76-1.11). The risk of bias for both studies was low.
Conclusion: No difference in healing outcomes between NSSD and LFUD debridement of diabetic foot ulcers was found. Well-designed, controlled clinical studies are needed to address the current paucity of studies examining the efficacy and comparative effectiveness of debridement methods.
期刊介绍:
Ostomy/Wound Management was founded in March of 1980 as "Ostomy Management." In 1985, this small journal dramatically expanded its content and readership by embracing the overlapping disciplines of ostomy care, wound care, incontinence care, and related skin and nutritional issues and became the premier journal of its kind. Ostomy/Wound Managements" readers include healthcare professionals from multiple disciplines. Today, our readers benefit from contemporary and comprehensive review and research papers that are practical, clinically oriented, and cutting edge. Each published article undergoes a rigorous double-blind peer review by members of both the Editorial Advisory Board and the Ad-Hoc Peer Review Panel.