However, there are few reports regarding the reasonable selection of dressings for certain types of wounds in the clinic. The therapeutic effect of modern wound dressings in the clinical management of wounds is documented. There are many factors involved in wound healing, and the healing process is not static.
#Mepilex ag side effects trial#
A randomised controlled trial of the effectiveness of soft silicone multi-layered foam dressings in the prevention of sacral and heel pressure ulcers in trauma and critically ill patients: the border trial. The effectiveness of two silicone dressings for sacral and heel pressure ulcer prevention compared with no dressings in high-risk intensive care unit patients: a randomized controlled parallel-group trial. Hahnel E, El Genedy M, Tomova-Simitchieva T, et al. Outcomes for pressure ulcer trials (OUTPUTs) project: review and classification of outcomes reported in pressure ulcer prevention research.
#Mepilex ag side effects skin#
Dry skin and pressure ulcer risk: a multi-center cross-sectional prevalence study in German hospitals and nursing homes. Lechner A, Lahmann N, Neumann K, Blume-Peytavi U, Kottner J. Prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers/injuries: Clinical Practice Guideline. Wound Repair and Regeneration published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The Wound Healing Society.Įuropean Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel and Pan Pacific Pressure Injury Alliance. Different dressings cause different cutaneous responses during loading. Study results indicate, that the application of preventive dressings on sacral skin during loading do not cause additional occlusion compared to loading without dressings when lying supine. Highest releases of IL-1α were observed in the ALLEVYN Life Sacrum and Optifoam Gentle Sacrum groups, in the Mepilex Border Sacrum group changes were minor. After loading, the erythema index was highest in the ALLEVYN Life Sacrum and no dressing groups. There was a median decrease of the mean roughness (Rz) in the Optifoam Gentle Sacrum group of -6.3 μm but no relevant changes in the other groups. Median stratum corneum hydration increased during the lying period in all groups with highest increases in the Optifoam Gentle Sacrum (7.3 arbitrary units) and no dressing group (7.0 arbitrary units). After 3.5 hours, the median skin temperature increased in all four groups between 3.0☌ and 3.8☌ with only minor differences between the no dressing and the dressing groups. Skin surface temperature, stratum corneum hydration, erythema, skin roughness and the interleukin 1 alpha (IL-1α) concentration per total protein were measured at baseline and after the lying periods. At regular intervals, subjects performed standardized movements to enhance shear loads. Healthy female volunteers (n = 12, mean age 72 years) wore three different dressings on their sacral skin for 3.5 hours while lying supine on a standard hospital mattress. An exploratory randomized crossover trial with intra-individual comparisons was conducted to compare the effects of three different multi-layer foam dressings (Mepilex Border Sacrum, ALLEVYN Life Sacrum and Optifoam Gentle Sacrum) compared to no dressing on the sacral skin. However, possible performance differences of different dressing types are unclear. Evidence suggests that preventive dressings applied on sacral skin help to prevent pressure ulcers.
0 kommentar(er)
