Journal of wound care · 2017
Negative pressure wound therapy versus gauze dressings for the treatment of contaminated traumatic wounds.
Сравнительное исследованиеКонтролируемое клиническое исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kaushik D, Joshi N, Kumar R, Gaba S, Sapra R, Kumar K
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This compares hospital suction negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) with conventional gauze dressings in traumatic soft-tissue injury at a tertiary care centre.
METHODS: A prospective control study was conducted between September 2012 and November 2014. Patients with one or more traumatic soft-tissue injuries with contaminated wounds were allocated to either a test group (received NPWT) or control group (received conventional gauze). Wounds were assessed by two orthopaedic surgeons. If grade A was achieved, the wound was covered with split-thickness skin graft, flap or delayed primary closure; otherwise, revision debridement and NPWT/saline gauze dressings were applied. Descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation and proportions) were used to summarise the study variables. The 95% confidence intervals (CI) for difference of mean were used. Chi-square test and Fisher's exact test were used to observe an association between the qualitative data and outcome variables. Unpaired T-Test and Mann-Whitney U test were used for analysis of the quantitative data. A p<0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: A total of 104 patients were included. The mean number of dressings per patient was significantly lower in the NPWT group (3.4) than in the control group (20.7) (p<0.001). The time between injury and complete closure (12.5 versus 21.4 days) as well as duration of hospital stay (17.3 versus 23.8 days) was significantly less in the NPWT group (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: NPWT has a role in healing traumatic wounds and can be delivered effectively through hospital suction NPWT, which can also reduce the cost of therapy. We recommend its regular use in all patients presenting with post-traumatic, soft-tissue injuries when primary coverage is not possible.
METHODS: A prospective control study was conducted between September 2012 and November 2014. Patients with one or more traumatic soft-tissue injuries with contaminated wounds were allocated to either a test group (received NPWT) or control group (received conventional gauze). Wounds were assessed by two orthopaedic surgeons. If grade A was achieved, the wound was covered with split-thickness skin graft, flap or delayed primary closure; otherwise, revision debridement and NPWT/saline gauze dressings were applied. Descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation and proportions) were used to summarise the study variables. The 95% confidence intervals (CI) for difference of mean were used. Chi-square test and Fisher's exact test were used to observe an association between the qualitative data and outcome variables. Unpaired T-Test and Mann-Whitney U test were used for analysis of the quantitative data. A p<0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: A total of 104 patients were included. The mean number of dressings per patient was significantly lower in the NPWT group (3.4) than in the control group (20.7) (p<0.001). The time between injury and complete closure (12.5 versus 21.4 days) as well as duration of hospital stay (17.3 versus 23.8 days) was significantly less in the NPWT group (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: NPWT has a role in healing traumatic wounds and can be delivered effectively through hospital suction NPWT, which can also reduce the cost of therapy. We recommend its regular use in all patients presenting with post-traumatic, soft-tissue injuries when primary coverage is not possible.