| 54 |
Laboratory Research
|
Comparison of the moisture control capability of a novel foam dressing to a variety of hydrocolloid dressings David Brett, BS, BS, MS, Smith & Nephew, Largo, FL Typically exudate is caused by the breakdown of necrotic tissue (via enzymatic, autolytic or biological debridement), an inflammatory response contributed to microbial contamination/infection or edema due to venous disease. The effective management of wound exudate is an essential function of wound dressings for use on exuding wounds. Failure to manage wound exudate can result in leaking of excess fluid under the dressing. This fluid is susceptible to leakage and may result in maceration to the surrounding skin. The purpose of this study is to investigate the moisture control properties of a novel foam dressing and a variety of hydrocolloid dressings in vitro to gain insight into their functionality in the clinic. The dressings were evaluated on Fluid Handling Capacity. There was a wide variation in fluid handling across the range of dressings tested. It is clear that traditional hydrocolloid dressings had a relatively low ability to handle fluid. As hydrocolloid dressings are known more for their occlusive nature and promotion of autolytic debridement, this is not a surprising result. One interesting point is that (of the dressings tested) those dressings which contain hydrocolloids, in addition to absorbent materials had very high fluid handling capacities. These ÒhybridÓ dressings may prove very efficacious in the clinic in that they are occlusive (promoting autolytic debridement), yet have the ability to absorb moisture, thus helping to minimize peri-wound maceration. Sibbald RG, Williamson D, Orsted HL, et al. Preparing the wound bedÑdebridement, bacterial balance and moisture balance. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2000;46(11):14Ð35 Falanga V. Classifications for wound bed preparation and stimulation of chronic wounds. Wound Rep Regen. 2000;8:347Ð352 Schultz GS, et al. Wound bed preparation: a systematic approach to wound management. Wound Rep Regen. 2003;11:1Ð28 |
|