Dumville Jo C, Stubbs Nikki, Keogh Samantha J, Walker Rachel M, Liu Zhenmi
School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Feb 17;2015(2):CD011226. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011226.pub2.
Pressure ulcers, also known as bedsores, decubitus ulcers and pressure injuries, are localised areas of injury to the skin or the underlying tissue, or both. Dressings are widely used to treat pressure ulcers and there are many different dressing options including hydrogel dressings. A clear and current overview of the current evidence is required to facilitate decision-making regarding dressing use for the treatment of pressure ulcers.
To assess the effects of hydrogel dressings on the healing of pressure ulcers in any care setting.
We searched the following databases: the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 19 June 2014); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 5); Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to June Week 2 2014); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, 23 June 2014); Ovid EMBASE (1974 to 20 June 2014); and EBSCO CINAHL (1982 to 18 June 2014). There were no restrictions based on language or date of publication.
Published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of hydrogel dressings with alternative wound dressings or no dressing in the treatment of pressure ulcers (stage II or above).
Two review authors independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction.
We included eleven studies (523 participants) in this review. Ten studies had two arms and one had three arms that were all relevant to this review. Three studies compared a hydrogel dressing with a basic wound contact dressing; three studies compared a hydrogel dressing with a hydrocolloid dressing; three studies compared a hydrogel dressing with another hydrogel dressing; one study compared a hydrogel dressing with a foam dressing; one study compared a hydrogel dressing with a dextranomer paste dressing and one study compared a hydrogel dressing with a topical treatment (collagenase). Limited data were available for analyses in this review: we conducted no meta-analyses. Where data were available there was no evidence of a difference between hydrogel and alternative treatments in terms of complete wound healing or adverse events. One small study reported that using hydrogel dressings was, on average, less costly than hydrocolloid dressings, but this estimate was imprecise and its methodology was not clear. All included studies were small, had short follow-up times and were at unclear risk of bias.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: It is not clear if hydrogel dressings are more or less effective than other treatments in healing pressure ulcers or if different hydrogels have different effects, Most trials in this field are very small and poorly reported so that risk of bias is unclear.
压疮,也被称为褥疮、卧疮和压力性损伤,是皮肤或其下组织或两者的局部损伤区域。敷料被广泛用于治疗压疮,有许多不同的敷料选择,包括水凝胶敷料。需要一份清晰且最新的现有证据综述,以促进关于使用敷料治疗压疮的决策。
评估水凝胶敷料在任何护理环境中对压疮愈合的影响。
我们检索了以下数据库:Cochrane伤口小组专业注册库(2014年6月19日检索);Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL;2014年第5期);Ovid MEDLINE(1946年至2014年6月第2周);Ovid MEDLINE(在研及其他未索引引文,2014年6月23日);Ovid EMBASE(1974年至2014年6月20日);以及EBSCO CINAHL(1982年至2014年6月18日)。没有基于语言或出版日期的限制。
比较水凝胶敷料与其他伤口敷料或不使用敷料在治疗II期及以上压疮中的效果的已发表或未发表的随机对照试验(RCT)。
两位综述作者独立进行研究选择、偏倚风险评估和数据提取。
本综述纳入了11项研究(523名参与者)。10项研究有两个组,1项研究有三个组,所有这些都与本综述相关。三项研究比较了水凝胶敷料与基本伤口接触敷料;三项研究比较了水凝胶敷料与水胶体敷料;三项研究比较了水凝胶敷料与另一种水凝胶敷料;一项研究比较了水凝胶敷料与泡沫敷料;一项研究比较了水凝胶敷料与葡聚糖omer糊剂敷料,一项研究比较了水凝胶敷料与局部治疗(胶原酶)。本综述中可供分析的数据有限:我们未进行荟萃分析。在有数据的情况下,没有证据表明水凝胶与其他治疗方法在完全伤口愈合或不良事件方面存在差异。一项小型研究报告称,平均而言,使用水凝胶敷料的成本低于水胶体敷料,但这一估计不准确且其方法不明确。所有纳入的研究规模都较小,随访时间短,偏倚风险不明确。
目前尚不清楚水凝胶敷料在愈合压疮方面比其他治疗方法更有效还是更无效,或者不同的水凝胶是否有不同的效果。该领域的大多数试验规模都非常小且报告不佳,因此偏倚风险不明确。