超声辅助伤口治疗与手术清创的疗效、耐受性和患者获益：一项随机临床研究。
Efficacy, tolerability and patient benefit of ultrasound-assisted wound treatment versus surgical debridement: a randomized clinical study.
机构信息
Center for Dermatological Research, Comprehensive Wound Center, University Clinics of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
出版信息
Dermatology. 2011;222(3):244-9. doi: 10.1159/000326116. Epub 2011 Apr 5.
BACKGROUND
Low-frequency ultrasound has been shown to be an alternative to surgical wound debridement (WD) to stimulate wound healing; however, few data are available.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the efficacy, tolerability and benefit of both wound treatment methods.
METHODS
A monocentric prospective randomized-controlled clinical study assessing patient-reported outcomes and clinical efficacy of ultrasound-assisted wound treatment (UAW) compared to WD.
RESULTS
In total, 67 patients were treated. Efficacy and tolerability were found to be good for both treatments, with 88% of UAW and 85.2% of WD patients experiencing more-than-minimal patient benefit. Quality of life improved significantly. Wound status improved and pain decreased in both groups.
CONCLUSION
Compared to the gold standard (i.e. WD), UAW displays the same high efficacy, comparable patient benefit and improved quality of life. Both procedures are equally suitable for highly beneficial guideline-based treatment of chronic wounds.
背景
低频超声已被证明是一种替代外科清创术（WD）来刺激伤口愈合的方法；然而，可用的数据很少。
目的
比较两种伤口处理方法的疗效、耐受性和益处。
方法
一项单中心前瞻性随机对照临床试验，评估了超声辅助伤口处理（UAW）与 WD 相比的患者报告结果和临床疗效。
结果
共有 67 名患者接受了治疗。两种治疗方法的疗效和耐受性均良好，UAW 组有 88%的患者和 WD 组有 85.2%的患者经历了超过最小程度的患者获益。生活质量显著改善。两组的伤口状况均有所改善，疼痛减轻。
结论
与金标准（即 WD）相比，UAW 显示出相同的高疗效、可比的患者获益和改善的生活质量。两种方法均适用于基于指南的慢性伤口的高度有益治疗。
Zotero 插件