Reference/Citation: Vermeulen H, van Hattem JM, Storm-Versloot MN, Ubbink DT. Topical silver for treating infected wounds. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007(1);CD005486. Clinical Question: What is the clinical evidence base for silver dressings in the management of contaminated and infected acute and chronic wounds? Data Sources: Investigations were identified by Cochrane Wounds Group Specialized Register (2006), CENTRAL (2006), MEDLINE (2002–2006), EMBASE (2002–2006), CINAHL (2002–2006), and digital dissertations (2006) searches. Product manufacturers were contacted to identify additional eligible studies. The search terms included wound infection, surgical wound infection, ulcer, wound healing, and silver. Study Selection: Each study fulfilled the following criteria: (1) The study was a randomized controlled trial of human participants that compared dressings containing silver with any dressings without silver, dressings with other antiseptics, or dressings with different dosages of silver. (2) The participants were aged 18 years and older with contaminated and infected open wounds of any cause. (3) The study had to evaluate the effectiveness of the dressings using an objective measure of healing. No language or publication status restrictions were imposed, and participants could be recruited in any care setting. Studies were excluded if the wounds were ostomies (surgically formed passages). Data Extraction: Study quality assessment was conducted independently by 3 authors using the Dutch Institute for Health Care Improvement and Dutch Cochrane Centre protocols. Characteristics of the study, participants, interventions, and outcome measures were extracted by one author and verified by a second using a standard form. The principal outcome measure was healing (time to complete healing, rate of change in wound area and volume, number and proportion of wounds healed within trial period). Secondary measures were adverse events (eg, pain, maceration, erythema), dressing leakage, and wound odor. Based on the unique comparisons in the studies, a meta-analysis was not conducted. As a result, summary estimates of treatment effect were calculated for each outcome comparison. RevMan software (version 4.2; Cochrane Centre, Oxford, United Kingdom) was used for statistical analysis. Main Results: Specific search criteria identified 31 studies for review, of which 3 met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Lack of randomization and absence of wound infections excluded the majority of studies from the review. In the 3 studies selected, silver-containing dressings were compared with nonsilver dressings and dressings with other antimicrobials. One group used a silver-containing foam dressing and a nonsilver foam dressing; another group used a silver-containing alginate and a nonsilver alginate; and a third group used a silver-containing foam and various dressings (nonsilver foams, alginates, hydrocolloids, and gauze and other antimicrobial dressings). Sample sizes ranged between 99 and 619 participants. Most of the wounds in the included studies were pressure, diabetic, and venous leg ulcers. Wound infection was subjectively defined by 1 group as the presence of 2 or more signs and symptoms (eg, continuous pain, erythema, heat, or moderate to high levels of exudate) and by the other 2 groups as signs of critical colonization (eg, delayed healing, increased pain and exudate levels, discoloration, and odor). The primary measure in the included studies was healing outcome. The 3 groups used various assessments of healing, including relative and absolute reduction in wound area and number of wounds healed during the trial period. The trial period in each study was 4 weeks. In the 3 trials, the authors randomized the participants to the treatment groups. Examining healing, one group (129 participants) compared Contreet silver foam (Coloplast A/S, Humlebaek, Denmark) with Allevyn foam (Smith & Nephew, St-Laurent, Quebec, Canada). The authors reported no differences for rates of complete healing (risk difference [RD] = 0.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −0.09, 0.09) and median wound area reduction (weighted mean difference [WMD] = −0.30 cm2, 95% CI = −2.92, 2.35). However, Contreet was favored over Allevyn (P = .034) for median relative reduction in wound area (WMD = −15.70 cm2, 95% CI = −29.5, −1.90). One group (99 participants) compared Silvercel silver alginate (Johnson & Johnson Wound Management, Somerville, NJ) with Algosteril alginate (Johnson & Johnson Wound Management). The authors found no differences in rates of complete healing (RD = 0.00, 95% CI = −0.06, 0.05), mean absolute (WMD = 4.50 cm2, 95% CI = −0.93, 9.93) and relative wound area reduction (WMD = −0.30 cm2, 95% CI = −17.08, 16.48), or healing rate per day (week 1 to 4) (WMD = 0.16 cm2, 95% CI = −0.03, 0.35). One group (619 participants) compared Contreet with various dressings (nonsilver foams, alginates, hydrocolloids, and gauze and other antimicrobial dressings). For median relative wound area reduction, the authors noted a superiority of Contreet over the various dressings (P = .0019). Examining secondary outcomes, 2 groups used subjective analysis to compare adverse reactions among the dressings. One group reported no difference between Contreet (in satellite ulcers, deterioration of periwound tissue) and Allevyn (in satellite ulcers, maceration, eczema) (RD = 0.02, 95% CI = −0.07, 0.12), and one group found no difference between Silvercel (in pain during dressing change, eczema, periwound erythema, maceration) and Algosteril (in pain during dressing change, eczema, erythema) (RD = −0.01, 95% CI = −0.12, 0.11). Two groups subjectively assessed leakage among silver and nonsilver dressings. The data from one group demonstrated superiority of Contreet over Allevyn (P = .002; RD = −0.30, 95% CI = −0.47, −0.13), and one group found Contreet better than various dressings (eg, nonsilver foams, alginates, hydrocolloids, and gauze, and other antimicrobial dressings) (P = .0005; RD = −0.11, 95% CI = −0.18, −0.05). Using a subjective 4-point scale, one group compared silver and nonsilver dressings and reported a difference favoring Contreet over Allevyn in terms of wound odor (P = .030; RD = −0.19, 95% CI = −0.36, −0.03). Conclusions: Overall, this review provides no clear evidence to support the use of silver-containing foam and alginate dressings in the management of infected chronic wounds for up to 4 weeks. However, the use of silver foam dressings resulted in a greater reduction in wound size and more effective control of leakage and odor than did use of nonsilver dressings. Randomized controlled trials using standardized outcome measures and longer follow-up periods are needed to determine the most appropriate dressing for contaminated and infected acute and chronic wounds.
This review provides evidence that tissue adhesives are an option to SWC (sutures, staples, adhesive strips) for the management of simple traumatic lacerations. Overall, no significant differences were found in cosmetic scores at the reported assessment periods between tissue adhesives and SWC. At 1 to 3 months, a subgroup analysis significantly favored butylcyanoacrylate over SWC. Tissue adhesives significantly lowered the time to complete the procedure, levels of pain, and rate of erythema. However, the data revealed a significant increase in the rate of dehiscence with the use of tissue adhesives when compared with SWC. The low methodologic quality of the evidence should be considered in the interpretation of the findings.
Context: Acute skin trauma during sport participation, resulting in partial-thickness abrasions, is common. The limited investigations focusing on the acute wound environment and dressing techniques and the subsequent lack of evidence-based standards complicate clinical wound care decisions.Objective: To examine the effects of occlusive dressings on healing of standardized, partial-thickness abrasions.Design: Controlled, counterbalanced, repeated-measures design.Setting: University laboratory.Patients or Other Participants: Sixteen healthy women (n 5 10) and men (n 5 6).Intervention(s): Four standardized, partial-thickness abrasions were inflicted. Film, hydrogel, and hydrocolloid occlusive dressings and no dressing (control) were applied. Participants returned on postwound days 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, and 14 for digital imaging. Wound healing time was measured by change in wound contraction (cm 2 ) and change in wound color (chromatic red) and luminance in red, green, and blue color values.Main Outcome Measure(s): Wound contraction, color (chromatic red), and luminance.Results: A day-by-dressing interaction was found for wound contraction, color, and luminance. Post hoc testing indicated that the film and hydrocolloid dressings produced greater wound contraction than the hydrogel and no dressing on days 7 and 10. Film, hydrogel, and hydrocolloid dressings also resulted in greater wound contraction than the control on day 14. Hydrocolloid dressings produced smaller measures of color and greater measures of luminance than no dressing on day 7. Film, hydrogel, and hydrocolloid dressings also resulted in smaller measures of color and greater measures of luminance compared with no dressing on days 10 and 14.Conclusions: When compared with the control (no dressing), the film, hydrogel, and hydrocolloid occlusive dressings were associated with a faster healing rate of partial-thickness abrasions across time measured by wound contraction, color, and luminance. Overall, these data indicate that occlusive dressings were more effective in healing than no dressing was.Key Words: wound management, skin trauma, moist environment Key Points N Partial-thickness abrasions treated with film, hydrogel, and hydrocolloid occlusive dressings healed more quickly, as measured by wound contraction, color, and luminance, than those receiving no dressing.N Additional studies are needed to determine the practicality, cost-effectiveness, and compliance level when occlusive dressings are used in the clinical setting.
Objective: To present recommendations for the cleansing, debridement, dressing, and monitoring of acute skin trauma in patients.Background: Acute skin trauma is common during participation in athletic and recreational activities. Clinical decisions and intervention protocols after injury vary among athletic trainers and are often based on ritualistic practices. An understanding of cleansing, debridement, and dressing techniques; clinical features of infection and adverse reactions; and monitoring of acute skin trauma is critical for certified athletic trainers and other allied health and medical professionals to create a local wound environment that promotes healing and lessens the risk of complications.Recommendations: These guidelines are intended to provide the certified athletic trainer and others participating in athletic health care with specific knowledge about and recommendations for the management of acute skin trauma.Key Words: abrasions, avulsions, blisters, incisions, lacerations, punctures, cleansing, debridement, nonocclusive dressings, occlusive dressings, infection, adverse reactions T raumatic injury to the skin is common among athletes participating in all sports.1 The exact frequencies of abrasions, avulsions, blisters, incisions, lacerations, and punctures are difficult to calculate because many patients do not seek medical attention after injury; for others, their activity level is initially unaffected, and the injury is not recorded on surveillance reports. Unreported skin trauma and inappropriate wound management can result in delayed healing, cross-contamination, bacterial colonization, and infection, adversely affecting the overall health and playing status of the patient. Managing acute skin trauma through appropriate cleansing, debridement, and dressing techniques can create an environment conducive to healing and lessen the risk of complications. 2,3Wound-management techniques have undergone drastic changes over the last 50 years, and other allied health care professions, organizations, and facilities have developed guidelines that serve as standards of care. [4][5][6] However, guidelines for the management of acute skin trauma by athletic trainers (ATs) are limited in the literature.1,7 The development and implementation of cleansing, debridement, and dressing techniques for acute skin trauma are critical for ATs to successfully deliver health care services to patients. The following review and recommendations provide information on the management of acute skin trauma and guidelines for ATs and other allied health and medical professionals who care for patients. RECOMMENDATIONSThis position statement is based on current research and literature with regard to the cleansing, debridement, dressing, and monitoring of acute skin trauma. We independently categorized the studies and literature using the Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT) developed by the American Academy of Family Physicians. 8 The taxonomy grades the quality of the data from the literature (level of evidence) and p...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.