These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Systematic review and quality assessment of clinical and economic evidence for superabsorbent wound dressings in a population with chronic ulcers.
    Author: M Veličković V, Macmillan T, Lones E, Arlouskaya Y, Prieto PA, Webb N, Crompton A, Munro I, Carvalho VF, Attila S, Bárdos D, Lin Y, Chiao H, Probst S.
    Journal: Int Wound J; 2024 Mar; 21(3):e14750. PubMed ID: 38468367.
    Abstract:
    Effective exudate management is key for optimal ulcer healing. Superabsorbent dressings are designed to have high fluid handling capacity, reduced risk of exudate leakage, fluid retention under compression, and to sequester harmful exudate components. This study aimed to systematically identify existing evidence for the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of superabsorbent dressings for the treatment of moderate-to-highly exudating chronic ulcers of various etiologies. The aim is focused on examining the 'class' effect of all superabsorbers, not any particular dressing. Clinical and cost effectiveness systematic reviews were conducted, searching Embase, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. The Cost Effectiveness Analysis Registry and Econ papers were also searched for the economic review. Outcomes of interest included ulcer closure, dressing properties, hospital- and infection-related outcomes, safety, and economic outcomes. Fourteen studies were included in the clinical systematic review. Eleven were case series, with one randomised controlled trial, one retrospective matched observational study, and one retrospective cohort study. The studies investigated eight superabsorbent dressings and were heterogeneous in their patient population and outcomes. Superabsorbent dressings may result in favourable outcomes, including reductions in frequency of dressing change and pain scores. As most studies were case series, drawing firm conclusions was difficult due to absence of a comparator arm. The economic systematic review identified seven studies, five of which were cost-utility analyses. These suggested superabsorbent dressings are a more cost-effective option for the treatment of chronic ulcers compared with standard dressings. However, the small number and low quality of studies identified in both reviews highlights the need for future research.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]