Journal of wound care · 2013
NPWT or HRT-dressing? Results of an expert panel and a Delphi panel analysis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Hermans M H E, Cutting K
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the similarities and differences between Hydration Response Technology (HRT) and negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) with regard to wound bed preparation, and to devise a set of recommendations for their use on the basis of the opinion of two panels.
METHOD: An expert panel that analysed in vitro and clinical data as well as the similarities and differences between the two modalities was established. This culminated in a series of recommendations on which modality to use for which indication. These recommendations were presented to a Delphi panel, consisting of users of both NPWT and HRT-dressing. The panel was then asked to produce its own recommendations.
RESULTS: The outcomes and recommendations of both panels were reported. NPWT is the preferred treatment modality for abdominal dehisced wounds, and to a lesser extent, for surgical wound healing by secondary intention. For all other indications, the treatment modalities are at least equal, with HRT-dressing often being the superior mode to treat wounds such as venous leg ulcers, arterial ulcers and vasculitis.
CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the expert panel and the Delphi panel, both modalities share a number of clinical and non-clinical properties. However, because of the numerous advantages of HRT technology, HRT dressing has the potential to replace NPWT in a number of indications, where the patient, health-care providers and institutions may benefit.
DECLARATION OF INTEREST: This study was sponsored by Sorbion GmbH & Co, Senden, Germany. Authors M. Hermans and K. Cutting are consultants to Sorbion GmbH & Co, Senden, Germany.
METHOD: An expert panel that analysed in vitro and clinical data as well as the similarities and differences between the two modalities was established. This culminated in a series of recommendations on which modality to use for which indication. These recommendations were presented to a Delphi panel, consisting of users of both NPWT and HRT-dressing. The panel was then asked to produce its own recommendations.
RESULTS: The outcomes and recommendations of both panels were reported. NPWT is the preferred treatment modality for abdominal dehisced wounds, and to a lesser extent, for surgical wound healing by secondary intention. For all other indications, the treatment modalities are at least equal, with HRT-dressing often being the superior mode to treat wounds such as venous leg ulcers, arterial ulcers and vasculitis.
CONCLUSION: In the opinion of the expert panel and the Delphi panel, both modalities share a number of clinical and non-clinical properties. However, because of the numerous advantages of HRT technology, HRT dressing has the potential to replace NPWT in a number of indications, where the patient, health-care providers and institutions may benefit.
DECLARATION OF INTEREST: This study was sponsored by Sorbion GmbH & Co, Senden, Germany. Authors M. Hermans and K. Cutting are consultants to Sorbion GmbH & Co, Senden, Germany.