Advances in skin & wound care · 2020
Highly Hydrophilic Polyurethane Foam Dressing Versus Early Hydrophilic Polyurethane Foam Dressing on Skin Graft Donor Site Healing in Patients with Diabetes: An Exploratory Clinical Trial.
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.
Namgoong Sik, Jung Jae-Eun, Yoon Young-Don, Han Seung-Kyu, Lee Ye-Na, Son Ji-Won
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of early hydrophilic polyurethane (EHP) foam dressing and highly hydrophilic polyurethane (HHP) foam dressing on wound healing in patients with diabetes.
METHODS: Twenty patients with diabetes with skin graft donor sites on the lateral thigh were enrolled in this study. Each donor site was divided into two equal-sized areas for the application of HHP or EHP foam dressing. The study endpoint was the time required for healing, defined as complete epithelialization of the donor site without discharge. All possible adverse events were also documented.
MAIN RESULTS: Donor site healing was faster in 15 patients on the HHP half and 1 patient on the EHP half. In four patients, healing rates were the same between the HHP and EHP areas. Donor sites treated with HHP and EHP foam dressings healed in 17.2 ± 4.4 and 19.6 ± 3.7 days (P = .007), respectively. During the study period, no adverse event associated with the dressings occurred in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: The HHP foam dressing might provide faster healing than EHP foam dressing for skin graft donor sites in patients with diabetes.
METHODS: Twenty patients with diabetes with skin graft donor sites on the lateral thigh were enrolled in this study. Each donor site was divided into two equal-sized areas for the application of HHP or EHP foam dressing. The study endpoint was the time required for healing, defined as complete epithelialization of the donor site without discharge. All possible adverse events were also documented.
MAIN RESULTS: Donor site healing was faster in 15 patients on the HHP half and 1 patient on the EHP half. In four patients, healing rates were the same between the HHP and EHP areas. Donor sites treated with HHP and EHP foam dressings healed in 17.2 ± 4.4 and 19.6 ± 3.7 days (P = .007), respectively. During the study period, no adverse event associated with the dressings occurred in either group.
CONCLUSIONS: The HHP foam dressing might provide faster healing than EHP foam dressing for skin graft donor sites in patients with diabetes.