Journal of wound care · 2021
A tale of two alginates.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Walker Mike, Hurlow Jennifer
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: All fibrous wound dressings are considered to have the same action and value to the support of wound healing. Although clear distinction has been accepted between cotton gauze and calcium alginates, there is still no formally recognised distinction between calcium alginates and the more rapidly gelling fibre dressings.
METHOD: Scientific and clinical evaluations were used to differentiate two different fibrous wound care products. One is derived from polymer extraction of algae (alginate dressings); the other has been manufactured from a uniquely patented carboxymethylation process that produces 100% carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC)-based dressings. Structural differences between these dressings were evaluated with respect to three important areas of wound care management: optimal wound moisture control; the ability to reduce risk of complication by locking away harmful components (e.g. bacteria); and reducing the overall cost of wound care by promoting more efficient use of nursing time.
RESULTS: Clear differentiation was illustrated through both scientific and clinical evaluations.
CONCLUSION: This study supports the potential advantages of using a technically advanced fibrous wound dressing over the traditional fibrous alginate wound care product.
METHOD: Scientific and clinical evaluations were used to differentiate two different fibrous wound care products. One is derived from polymer extraction of algae (alginate dressings); the other has been manufactured from a uniquely patented carboxymethylation process that produces 100% carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC)-based dressings. Structural differences between these dressings were evaluated with respect to three important areas of wound care management: optimal wound moisture control; the ability to reduce risk of complication by locking away harmful components (e.g. bacteria); and reducing the overall cost of wound care by promoting more efficient use of nursing time.
RESULTS: Clear differentiation was illustrated through both scientific and clinical evaluations.
CONCLUSION: This study supports the potential advantages of using a technically advanced fibrous wound dressing over the traditional fibrous alginate wound care product.