In recent years, adhesive wound dressings have been increasingly applied postoperatively because of their ease of use as they can be kept in place without having to cut and apply surgical tapes and they can cover a wound securely. However, if a wound dressing strongly adheres to the wound, a large amount of stratum corneum is removed from the newly formed epithelium or healthy periwound skin. Various types of adhesives are used on adhesive wound dressings and the extent of skin damage depends on how much an adhesive sticks to the wound or skin surface. We quantitatively determined and compared the amount of stratum corneum removed by eight different wound dressings including polyurethane foam using acrylic adhesive, silicone-based adhesive dressing, composite hydrocolloid and self-adhesive polyurethane foam in healthy volunteers. The results showed that wound dressings with silicone adhesive and self-adhesive polyurethane foam removed less stratum corneum, whereas composite hydrocolloid and polyurethane foam using acrylic adhesive removed more stratum corneum.
Reducing pain caused by the removal of adhesive wound dressing materials is very important in clinical practice and is also one of the factors to consider when choosing dressing materials. A visual analogue scale is the most popular method for assessing pain, but it is subjective and is difficult to evaluate quantitatively or statistically. Recently, a new method for the quantitative measurement of pain intensity using a painless electrical stimulation system, PainVision™, has been developed. In this study, we evaluated pain intensity during the removal of wound dressing materials in healthy volunteers by comparing pain during the removal of wound dressing materials, which use acrylic pressure-sensitive adhesive and pain during the removal of materials, which use soft silicone adhesive, as evaluated using the PainVision™ system. Pain intensity was significantly lower with the dressing materials, which use soft silicone adhesive when measured with the PainVision™ system. The PainVision™ system promises to be useful for the quantitative assessment of pain caused by the removal of adhesive wound dressing materials. Further studies are needed to determine whether the PainVision™ system is also effective in measuring pain caused by the removal of wound dressing materials in actual wounds.
Various suture materials have been used for tendon repair. Barbed suture in particular has been demonstrated to be effective for both wound closure and tendon repair. Ten fresh-frozen flexor digitorum profundus tendons of pig were transected and repaired using the two-strand modified Kirchmayr-Kessler technique. The samples were divided into two groups: 4-0 barbed absorbable polyglyconate sutures and 4-0 monofilament absorbable polyglyconate sutures. We measured tensile strength and distance that the testing system pulled the tendon using a universal testing machine. Tensile strength at which 1 and 2 mm of gapping occurred was measured visually at the repair site. Tendons repaired by barbed sutures showed greater tensile strength than monofilament sutures forming still 2-mm gap. However, statistical significance was obtained only at 1-mm gap formation. We concluded that for tendon repair, barbed sutures were superior material to monofilament sutures because of their greater tensile strength, reducing both the initial tendon load and the risk of dehiscence.
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.