178 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36106557)
1. Differences in prophylactic performance across wound dressing types used to protect from device-related pressure ulcers caused by a continuous positive airway pressure mask.
Orlov A; Gefen A
Int Wound J; 2023 Apr; 20(4):942-960. PubMed ID: 36106557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The biomechanical efficacy of a hydrogel-based dressing in preventing facial medical device-related pressure ulcers.
Grigatti A; Gefen A
Int Wound J; 2022 Aug; 19(5):1051-1063. PubMed ID: 34623741
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Dressings cut to shape alleviate facial tissue loads while using an oxygen mask.
Peko Cohen L; Ovadia-Blechman Z; Hoffer O; Gefen A
Int Wound J; 2019 Jun; 16(3):813-826. PubMed ID: 30838792
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. [Face protective patches do not reduce facial pressure ulcers in a simulated model of non-invasive ventilation].
Riquelme M H; Wood V D; Martínez F S; Carmona M F; Peña V A; Wegner A A
Rev Chil Pediatr; 2017 Jun; 88(3):354-359. PubMed ID: 28737194
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The biomechanical protective effects of a treatment dressing on the soft tissues surrounding a non-offloaded sacral pressure ulcer.
Schwartz D; Gefen A
Int Wound J; 2019 Jun; 16(3):684-695. PubMed ID: 30697945
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The contribution of a directional preference of stiffness to the efficacy of prophylactic sacral dressings in protecting healthy and diabetic tissues from pressure injury: computational modelling studies.
Levy A; Schwartz D; Gefen A
Int Wound J; 2017 Dec; 14(6):1370-1377. PubMed ID: 28960851
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Foam dressings for treating pressure ulcers.
Walker RM; Gillespie BM; Thalib L; Higgins NS; Whitty JA
Cochrane Database Syst Rev; 2017 Oct; 10(10):CD011332. PubMed ID: 29025198
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Protecting prone positioned patients from facial pressure ulcers using prophylactic dressings: A timely biomechanical analysis in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Peko L; Barakat-Johnson M; Gefen A
Int Wound J; 2020 Dec; 17(6):1595-1606. PubMed ID: 32618418
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Computer Modeling Studies to Assess Whether a Prophylactic Dressing Reduces the Risk for Deep Tissue Injury in the Heels of Supine Patients with Diabetes.
Levy A; Gefen A
Ostomy Wound Manage; 2016 Apr; 62(4):42-52. PubMed ID: 27065218
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. [Preventing Facial Pressure Injuries in Patients Who Use Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilators: The Efficiency of Dressings].
Tai CH; Hsu MY
Hu Li Za Zhi; 2016 Oct; 63(5):86-94. PubMed ID: 27699743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Assessment of the Biomechanical Effects of Prophylactic Sacral Dressings on Tissue Loads: A Computational Modeling Analysis.
Levy A; Gefen A
Ostomy Wound Manage; 2017 Oct; 63(10):48-55. PubMed ID: 29091038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Face Masks for Noninvasive Ventilation: Fit, Excess Skin Hydration, and Pressure Ulcers.
Visscher MO; White CC; Jones JM; Cahill T; Jones DC; Pan BS
Respir Care; 2015 Nov; 60(11):1536-47. PubMed ID: 26420902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Application of self-made anti-pressure sore cotton cover in preventing facial pressure injury in patients with non-invasive ventilation].
Li W; Chen X; Yao X; Zhang Y; Fang W; Zhang J
Zhonghua Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue; 2023 Aug; 35(8):881-883. PubMed ID: 37593871
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The biomechanical efficacy of a dressing with a soft cellulose fluff core in prophylactic use.
Gefen A; Krämer M; Brehm M; Burckardt S
Int Wound J; 2020 Dec; 17(6):1968-1985. PubMed ID: 32869507
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Effect of Humidified Noninvasive Ventilation on the Development of Facial Skin Breakdown.
Alqahtani JS; Worsley P; Voegeli D
Respir Care; 2018 Sep; 63(9):1102-1110. PubMed ID: 30166409
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Preventing facial pressure ulcers in patients under non-invasive mechanical ventilation: a randomised control trial.
Otero DP; Domínguez DV; Fernández LH; Magariño AS; González VJ; Klepzing JV; Montesinos JV
J Wound Care; 2017 Mar; 26(3):128-136. PubMed ID: 28277990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. [A comparison of the efficacy of different wound dressing management techniques in preventing pressure ulcers].
Tsao WY; Lo SF; Harmod T; Lee RP
Hu Li Za Zhi; 2013 Aug; 60(4):65-75. PubMed ID: 23922092
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Effect of prophylactic dressings to reduce pressure injuries: a polymer-based skin model.
Kohta M; Yunoki S; Sugama J
J Wound Care; 2024 Feb; 33(Sup2):S4-S9. PubMed ID: 38348862
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The biomechanical efficacy of a dressing with a soft cellulose fluff core in protecting prone surgical patients from chest injuries on the operating table.
Lustig M; Gefen A
Int Wound J; 2022 Nov; 19(7):1786-1796. PubMed ID: 35243764
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Reducing the Incidence of Medical Device-Related Pressure Injuries From Use of CPAP/BiPAP Masks: A Quality Improvement Project.
Arundel L; Irani E; Barkema G
J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs; 2021 Mar-Apr 01; 48(2):108-114. PubMed ID: 33690244
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
