Suppr超能文献

一项前瞻性随机临床试验,旨在评估现代泡沫敷料与传统盐水纱布敷料在治疗II期压疮方面的成本效益。

A prospective, randomized clinical trial to assess the cost-effectiveness of a modern foam dressing versus a traditional saline gauze dressing in the treatment of stage II pressure ulcers.

作者信息

Payne Wyatt G, Posnett John, Alvarez Oscar, Brown-Etris Marie, Jameson Gayle, Wolcott Randall, Dharma Hussein, Hartwell Samantha, Ochs Diane

机构信息

Institute for Tissue Regeneration, Repair and Rehabilitation, Bay Pines VA Healthcare System, Bay Pines, FL, USA.

出版信息

Ostomy Wound Manage. 2009 Feb;55(2):50-5.

Abstract

Modern dressings such as hydrocolloids, gels, and foams are typically more expensive than traditional dressings such as gauze. However, if modern dressings require fewer changes, the overall cost of treatment may be lower despite the higher initial purchase price. If healing rates are comparable or better, modern dressings also may be cost-effective. A 4-week, prospective, randomized clinical trial to assess differences in treatment costs and cost-effectiveness between a modern foam dressing and saline-soaked gauze was conducted among 36 patients (22 men, 14 women, mean age 72.8 years) with a Stage II pressure ulcer (mean duration 35 weeks) at five centers in the United States. Participants were randomized to treatment with a self-adhesive polyurethane foam (n = 20) or saline-soaked gauze dressing (n = 16). No difference in time to wound closure was observed (P = 0.817). Patients in the foam group had less frequent dressing changes (P <0.001). Total cost over the study period was lower by $466 per patient (P = 0.055) and spending on dressings was lower by $92 per patient in the foam group (P = 0.025). Cost per ulcer healed was lower by $1,517 and cost per ulcer-free day was lower by $80 for patients in the foam group. On the evidence of this study, the foam dressing is a more cost-effective treatment than saline-soaked gauze for the treatment of Stage II pressure ulcers.

摘要

水胶体、凝胶和泡沫等现代敷料通常比纱布等传统敷料更昂贵。然而,如果现代敷料更换次数更少,尽管初始购买价格较高,但总体治疗成本可能更低。如果愈合率相当或更高,现代敷料也可能具有成本效益。在美国五个中心,对36例(22例男性,14例女性,平均年龄72.8岁)患有II期压疮(平均病程35周)的患者进行了一项为期4周的前瞻性随机临床试验,以评估一种现代泡沫敷料与盐水浸泡纱布在治疗成本和成本效益方面的差异。参与者被随机分为使用自粘性聚氨酯泡沫治疗组(n = 20)或盐水浸泡纱布敷料治疗组(n = 16)。未观察到伤口愈合时间的差异(P = 0.817)。泡沫组患者的敷料更换频率更低(P <0.001)。研究期间,泡沫组每位患者的总成本降低了466美元(P = 0.055),敷料支出每位患者降低了92美元(P = 0.025)。泡沫组患者每治愈一个溃疡的成本降低了1517美元,每无溃疡天数的成本降低了80美元。根据这项研究的证据,对于II期压疮的治疗,泡沫敷料比盐水浸泡纱布是一种更具成本效益的治疗方法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验