Efficacy, tolerability and patient benefit of ultrasound-assisted wound treatment versus surgical debridement: a randomized clinical study.

BACKGROUND

Low-frequency ultrasound has been shown to be an alternative to surgical wound debridement (WD) to stimulate wound healing; however, few data are available.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy, tolerability and benefit of both wound treatment methods.

METHODS

A monocentric prospective randomized-controlled clinical study assessing patient-reported outcomes and clinical efficacy of ultrasound-assisted wound treatment (UAW) compared to WD.

RESULTS

In total, 67 patients were treated. Efficacy and tolerability were found to be good for both treatments, with 88% of UAW and 85.2% of WD patients experiencing more-than-minimal patient benefit. Quality of life improved significantly. Wound status improved and pain decreased in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Compared to the gold standard (i.e. WD), UAW displays the same high efficacy, comparable patient benefit and improved quality of life. Both procedures are equally suitable for highly beneficial guideline-based treatment of chronic wounds.