Healing rate of hospital-acquired skin tears using adhesive silicone foam versus meshed silicone interface dressings: A prospective, randomized, non-inferiority pilot study

1Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: A skin tear is a traumatic wound that occurs in up to one in five hospitalized patients. Nursing care includes application of a dressing to create a moist wound healing environment. Aim: To compare the effectiveness of two standard dressings (adhesive silicone foam vs. meshed silicone interface) to heal hospital-acquired skin tear. Methods: An intention-to-treat pilot study was designed using a randomized, non-inferiority trial in an Australian tertiary hospital setting. Consenting participants (n = 52) had acquired a skin tear within the previous 24 h and had agreed to a 3-week follow-up. Data were collected between 2014 and 2020. The primary outcome measure was wound healing at 21 days. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar in both arms. Per protocol, 86% of skin tears were fully healed at 3 weeks in the adhesive silicone foam group, compared to 59% in the meshed silicone interface group. Greater healing was observed across all skin tear categories in the adhesive silicone foam dressing group. In the intention-to-treat sample, healing was 69% and 42%, respectively. Conclusions: Results suggest the adhesive silicone foam dressing may be superior, as it produced clinically significant healing of skin tears at 3 weeks compared to the meshed silicone interface dressing. Accounting for potential loss to follow-up, a sample of at least 103 participants per arm would be required to power a definitive study.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fulbrook, P., Miles, S. J., & Williams, D. M. (2024). Healing rate of hospital-acquired skin tears using adhesive silicone foam versus meshed silicone interface dressings: A prospective, randomized, non-inferiority pilot study. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 30(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/ijn.13229

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free