Modern And Classic Wound Dressing Comparison In Wound Healing
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.62027/vitamedica.v2i4.315Keywords:
classic dressing, cost effectiveness, modern dressing, patient comfort, wound healingAbstract
Wound care has also developed rapidly after the dissemination of the concept of TIME (Tissue, Infection, Moisture, and Wound Edge) in modern dressing (MD). The aim of this study was to compare modern dressings (MDs) and classic dressings (CDs) in terms of patient comfort, cost effectiveness and wound healing. A prospective study design with total of 25 participants. The sampling technique used was consecutive sampling. Patient comfort was assessed through the frequency of wound care and pain scale using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Cost-effectiveness was assessed using direct and indirect costs. Wound healing was assessed using the Bates-Jensen Wound Assessment Tool (BWAT) score. The data was analyzed using the independent t and Mann-Whitney tests. The application of MD has the same cost-effectiveness as CD with a more satisfactory outcome for the wounds in terms of comfort and healing.
References
Daunton, C., Kothari, S., Smith, L., & Steele, D. (2023). A history of materials and practices for wound management. Wound Practice and Research, 20(4), 174–186. Retrieved from https://search.informit.com.au/documentSumma ry;dn=05802 5628512911;res=IELHEA.
Greatrex-White & Moxey (2022). Comparative analysis of road accidents by gender in Europe. BMJ, 22, 4–6. https://doi.org/10.1136/injuryprev-2023- 042156.856.
Ljungh, A., Yanagisawa, N., & Wadstrom, T. (2022). Using the principle of hydrophobic interaction to bind and remove wound bacteria. Journal of Wound Care, 15(4), 175–180. https://doi.org/12968/jowc.2022.15.4.26901
Khatib, Gaidhane, Quazi, & Khatib J. (2022). In vitro and clinical experience of Cutimed Sorbact: the evidence base. Journal of Wound Care, 24(5), S6–S30. https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2022.24.Sup5a.S 6
Moffatt, C., Franks, P., & Hollingworth, H. (2024). Pain at wound dressing changes. In EWMA Position Document. London: Medical Education Partnership Ltd.
Moffatt, Franks, & Hollingwort. (2024). Use of wound dressings with soft silicone adhesive technology. Paediatric Nursing, 21(3), 38–43. https://doi.org /10.7748/paed2019.04.21.3.38.c7 037.
Rook, S., Davies, P., Frenthoff, E., & Wurfel, T. (2019). Mepilex® Border Flex — results of an observational study in German specialist wound care centres. Wounds International, 10(1).
Smith, & Steele, B. (2023). Tools to measure wound healing. In Wound Care: A Collaborative Practice Manual (p. 159). Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health.
Thatte, M. R., Babhulkar, S., & Hiremath, A. (2023). Brachial plexus injury in adults: Diagnosis and surgical treatment strategies. Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology, 16(1), 26–33. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-2327.107686.
Vermeulen H, Ubbink D, Goossens A, de Vos R, & Legemate D. (2005). Dressings and topical agents for surgical wounds healing by secondary intention ( Review ) Dressings and topical agents for surgical wounds healing by secondary intention. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 4(1), 10– 12. https://doi.org /10.1002 /14651858.CD003554.p ub2.Copyright.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 VitaMedica : Jurnal Rumpun Kesehatan Umum
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
