• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
A randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial comparing the performance of a soft silicone-coated wound contact layer (Mepitel One) with a lipidocolloid wound contact layer (UrgoTul) in the treatment of acute wounds.一项比较软性硅胶涂层伤口接触层(Mepitel One)与脂质水胶体伤口接触层(UrgoTul)在急性伤口治疗中的表现的随机、对照、非劣效性试验。
Int Wound J. 2018 Feb;15(1):159-169. doi: 10.1111/iwj.12853. Epub 2017 Dec 5.
2
A Randomized Controlled Study Evaluating the Clinical Benefits of a Cellulose Acetate Mesh Coated with a Soft Silicone in the Management of Acute Wounds.一项评估涂有软硅胶的醋酸纤维素网片在急性伤口处理中的临床益处的随机对照研究。
Wounds. 2018 Apr;30(4):84-89. Epub 2018 Jan 26.
3
Use of a new, flexible lipidocolloid dressing on acute and chronic wounds: results of a clinical study.新型柔性脂质胶体敷料在急慢性伤口上的应用:一项临床研究结果
J Wound Care. 2011 Apr;20(4):180, 182-5. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2011.20.4.180.
4
Using a new lipidocolloid dressing in paediatric wounds: results of French and German clinical studies.在儿科伤口中使用新型脂质胶体敷料:法国和德国临床研究结果。
J Wound Care. 2004 Jun;13(6):221-5. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2004.13.6.26630.
5
Impregnated acetate gauze compared with lipido-colloid contact layer at dressing removal pain: a single-blind cross-over randomised control trial.在换药疼痛方面,浸渍醋酸纱布与脂质胶体接触层的比较:一项单盲交叉随机对照试验。
J Wound Care. 2019 Feb 2;28(2):89-101. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2019.28.2.89.
6
Antibiotic ointment versus a silver-based dressing for children with extremity burns: A randomized controlled study.抗生素软膏与含银敷料治疗儿童四肢烧伤的随机对照研究。
J Pediatr Surg. 2019 Jul;54(7):1391-1396. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2018.06.011. Epub 2018 Jun 18.
7
An open, prospective, randomized pilot investigation evaluating pain with the use of a soft silicone wound contact layer vs bridal veil and staples on split thickness skin grafts as a primary dressing.一项开放性、前瞻性、随机对照试验性研究,评估在中厚皮片上使用柔软硅胶伤口接触层与婚纱面纱及缝合钉作为主要敷料时的疼痛情况。
J Burn Care Res. 2013 Nov-Dec;34(6):674-81. doi: 10.1097/BCR.0b013e3182853cd6.
8
A pragmatic randomised controlled clinical study to evaluate the use of silicone dressings for the treatment of skin tears.一项实用随机对照临床试验,旨在评估硅酮敷料治疗皮肤撕裂伤的效果。
Int Wound J. 2022 Jan;19(1):125-134. doi: 10.1111/iwj.13604. Epub 2021 May 7.
9
A multicentre clinical evaluation of Cuticell Contact silicone wound contact layer in daily practice.日常实践中Cuticell Contact硅酮伤口接触层的多中心临床评估。
Br J Community Nurs. 2015 Jun;Suppl Community Wound Care:S35-6, S38-41. doi: 10.12968/bjcn.2015.20.Sup6.S35.
10
The use of modern dressings in managing split-thickness skin graft donor sites: a single-centre randomised controlled trial.现代敷料在处理中厚皮片供皮区的应用:一项单中心随机对照试验。
J Wound Care. 2017 Jun 2;26(6):281-291. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2017.26.6.281.

引用本文的文献

1
Spincare System Demonstrates Safety and Efficacy in Treating Partial-Thickness Burns.斯派卡雷系统在治疗部分厚度烧伤方面展示了安全性和疗效。
J Burn Care Res. 2024 Aug 6;45(4):969-977. doi: 10.1093/jbcr/irae024.
2
A pragmatic randomised controlled clinical study to evaluate the use of silicone dressings for the treatment of skin tears.一项实用随机对照临床试验,旨在评估硅酮敷料治疗皮肤撕裂伤的效果。
Int Wound J. 2022 Jan;19(1):125-134. doi: 10.1111/iwj.13604. Epub 2021 May 7.
3
Retrospective Study on the Clinical Superiority of the Vacuum-Assisted Closure System with a Silicon-based Dressing over the Conventional Tie-over Bolster Technique in Skin Graft Fixation.硅基敷料负压封闭引流系统与传统打包加压技术在皮肤移植固定中的临床优势回顾性研究
Medicina (Kaunas). 2019 Dec 12;55(12):781. doi: 10.3390/medicina55120781.

本文引用的文献

1
The impact of stress at dressing change in patients with burns: a review of the literature on pain and itching.烧伤患者换药时应激的影响:关于疼痛与瘙痒的文献综述
Wounds. 2014 Mar;26(3):77-82.
2
Dressing-related trauma: clinical sequelae and resource utilization in a UK setting.敷料相关创伤:英国背景下的临床后遗症及资源利用情况
Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2014 Apr 28;6:227-39. doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S59005. eCollection 2014.
3
Hand burn management: minimising pain and trauma at dressing change.手部烧伤处理:在换药时减轻疼痛和创伤。
Br J Nurs. 2013;22(20):S46, S48-50. doi: 10.12968/bjon.2013.22.Sup20.S46.
4
An open, prospective, randomized pilot investigation evaluating pain with the use of a soft silicone wound contact layer vs bridal veil and staples on split thickness skin grafts as a primary dressing.一项开放性、前瞻性、随机对照试验性研究,评估在中厚皮片上使用柔软硅胶伤口接触层与婚纱面纱及缝合钉作为主要敷料时的疼痛情况。
J Burn Care Res. 2013 Nov-Dec;34(6):674-81. doi: 10.1097/BCR.0b013e3182853cd6.
5
Mepitel One: a wound contact layer with Safetac technology.美皮贴一号:采用Safetac技术的伤口接触层。
Br J Nurs. 2012;21(21):1271-2, 1274-7. doi: 10.12968/bjon.2012.21.21.1271.
6
Wound treatment and pain management: a stressful time.伤口治疗与疼痛管理:一段压力重重的时期。
Int Wound J. 2013 Dec;10(6):638-44. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-481X.2012.01038.x. Epub 2012 Aug 21.
7
Taking the trauma out of wound care: the importance of undisturbed healing.消除伤口护理中的创伤:不受干扰的愈合的重要性。
J Wound Care. 2012 Aug;21(8):359-60, 362, 364-8. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2012.21.8.359.
8
Removal of adhesive wound dressing and its effects on the stratum corneum of the skin: comparison of eight different adhesive wound dressings.移除粘性伤口敷料及其对皮肤角质层的影响:八种不同粘性伤口敷料的比较。
Int Wound J. 2014 Feb;11(1):50-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-481X.2012.01061.x. Epub 2012 Aug 7.
9
Measures of adult pain: Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS Pain), Numeric Rating Scale for Pain (NRS Pain), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Chronic Pain Grade Scale (CPGS), Short Form-36 Bodily Pain Scale (SF-36 BPS), and Measure of Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP).成人疼痛测量方法:疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS疼痛)、疼痛数字评定量表(NRS疼痛)、麦吉尔疼痛问卷(MPQ)、简化麦吉尔疼痛问卷(SF-MPQ)、慢性疼痛分级量表(CPGS)、简短健康调查36项身体疼痛量表(SF-36 BPS)以及间歇性和持续性骨关节炎疼痛测量量表(ICOAP)。
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011 Nov;63 Suppl 11:S240-52. doi: 10.1002/acr.20543.
10
The impact of atraumatic vs conventional dressings on pain and stress.无创敷料与传统敷料对疼痛和应激的影响。
J Wound Care. 2012 May;21(5):209-15. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2012.21.5.209.

一项比较软性硅胶涂层伤口接触层(Mepitel One)与脂质水胶体伤口接触层(UrgoTul)在急性伤口治疗中的表现的随机、对照、非劣效性试验。

A randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial comparing the performance of a soft silicone-coated wound contact layer (Mepitel One) with a lipidocolloid wound contact layer (UrgoTul) in the treatment of acute wounds.

机构信息

Verzy, France.

ResearchLink France, Mundolsheim, France.

出版信息

Int Wound J. 2018 Feb;15(1):159-169. doi: 10.1111/iwj.12853. Epub 2017 Dec 5.

DOI:10.1111/iwj.12853
PMID:29205809
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7949658/
Abstract

Wound contact layer (WCL) dressings are intended to protect tissue during the healing process. A randomised controlled trial was undertaken to compare 2 such dressings. Outpatients with acute wounds were randomly allocated to treatment with either a soft silicone-coated WCL (intervention group, n = 59) or a lipidocolloid-impregnated WCL (control group, n = 62). At the first dressing removal (day 3), 89.8% of patients in the intervention group experienced non-painful dressing removal (defined as a pain rating <30 mm on a 100 mm visual analogue scale), compared with 73.6% of patients in the control group (P = .017) (per protocol population). At day 21, wounds were considered as healed in 66.1% of patients in the intervention group compared with 43.5% in the control group (P = .012) (intention-to-treat population). Both dressings were well tolerated and rated highly in terms of in-use characteristics, although the soft silicone-coated WCL was rated significantly higher than the lipidocolloid-impregnated WCL in terms of its ability to remain in place (P= .016). The results indicate that the soft silicone-coated WCL is suitable for the management of acute wounds as it can minimise dressing-associated pain and support healing.

摘要

伤口接触层 (WCL) 敷料旨在保护组织在愈合过程中。一项随机对照试验比较了两种这样的敷料。将急性伤口的门诊患者随机分配到软硅胶涂层 WCL(干预组,n=59)或脂质胶体浸渍 WCL(对照组,n=62)治疗。在第一次换药(第 3 天)时,干预组 89.8%的患者经历了无痛换药(定义为疼痛评分<30mm 的 100mm 视觉模拟量表),而对照组为 73.6%(P=0.017)(按方案人群)。在第 21 天,干预组 66.1%的患者伤口被认为已经愈合,而对照组为 43.5%(P=0.012)(意向治疗人群)。两种敷料均耐受性良好,在使用特性方面评分很高,尽管软硅胶涂层 WCL在保持原位方面的能力明显优于脂质胶体浸渍 WCL(P=0.016)。结果表明,软硅胶涂层 WCL 适合管理急性伤口,因为它可以最大程度地减少与敷料相关的疼痛并支持愈合。