Wounds : a compendium of clinical research and practice · 2025
Removing the complexities associated with traditional negative pressure wound therapy (tNPWT) bridging applications.
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.
Chariker Mark E, Handsaker Joanne, McCarthy Catherine
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is an effective intervention for challenging wounds across multiple indications. Its application sometimes requires a technique known as 'bridging" to prevent ulcerations caused by delivery port and tubing when positioning the device, which requires extra time and resources. The bridging technique may be adopted when it is considered essential to move the NPWT delivery port away from the wound bed or when treating wounds in close proximity to each other.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey was undertaken by 200 health care professionals (HCPs) in the United States who are experienced in utilizing traditional negative pressure wound therapy (tNPWT) and bridging. Primary objectives were to explore HCP opinion on 2 types of tNPWT delivery ports (soft and hard) between 2 leading manufacturers. Questions focused on the need for bridging, alleviation of complexity in application, and reducing concerns relating to medical device-related pressure injury when applied to awkward anatomical areas.
RESULTS: HCPs (75%; n=150) largely agreed that the bridging technique makes application of tNPWT slightly more challenging. Reasons included additional time taken to apply (74%; n=148), increased dressing resource (67%; n=134), and additional staff required (50%; n=100). Over half (53%; n=106) agreed that the soft port can eliminate the need for bridging. The majority of wound specialists were significantly less likely to favor a hard port (58%; n=116). Two further potential benefits of using a tNPWT soft port include the associated risk of pain/pressure when applying a hard port over a smaller wound size (29%; n=58) and certain anatomical areas which pose a risk of pressure injury or kinked/twisted tubing (31%; n=62).
CONCLUSION: tNPWT soft ports remain effective regardless of kinks or twists and can eliminate bridging in anatomical areas where patients may weight-bear on tubing or delivery ports, saving time and decreasing risks of periwound trauma.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey was undertaken by 200 health care professionals (HCPs) in the United States who are experienced in utilizing traditional negative pressure wound therapy (tNPWT) and bridging. Primary objectives were to explore HCP opinion on 2 types of tNPWT delivery ports (soft and hard) between 2 leading manufacturers. Questions focused on the need for bridging, alleviation of complexity in application, and reducing concerns relating to medical device-related pressure injury when applied to awkward anatomical areas.
RESULTS: HCPs (75%; n=150) largely agreed that the bridging technique makes application of tNPWT slightly more challenging. Reasons included additional time taken to apply (74%; n=148), increased dressing resource (67%; n=134), and additional staff required (50%; n=100). Over half (53%; n=106) agreed that the soft port can eliminate the need for bridging. The majority of wound specialists were significantly less likely to favor a hard port (58%; n=116). Two further potential benefits of using a tNPWT soft port include the associated risk of pain/pressure when applying a hard port over a smaller wound size (29%; n=58) and certain anatomical areas which pose a risk of pressure injury or kinked/twisted tubing (31%; n=62).
CONCLUSION: tNPWT soft ports remain effective regardless of kinks or twists and can eliminate bridging in anatomical areas where patients may weight-bear on tubing or delivery ports, saving time and decreasing risks of periwound trauma.