Ibrahim Zizi M, Waked Instar S, Ibrahim Olfat
Assistant Professor, Department of Physical Therapy for Surgery, Faculty of Physical Therapy, Cairo University, Egypt.
Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Rehabilitation Sciences Department, College of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
J Wound Care. 2019 Apr 2;28(4):214-219. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2019.28.4.214.
To compare the efficacy of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) with that of microcurrent electrical stimulation (MES) on wound surface area, length of stay (LoS) and colony count of wounds in patients with burns.
Patients with thermal dermal burn injuries covering 25-40% of total body surface area were enrolled in this clinical trial. Participants were randomly allocated into three, equal-sized groups: patients receiving NPWT, patients receiving MES and a control group which received standard wound care. All groups received the same traditional physical therapy programme in addition to the same nursing and medical care. In all groups, wound surface area, colony count and LoS were measured 72 hours after thermal burn injury (pre), after 10 days and again at 21 days from the beginning of the study.
A total of 45 patients took part in the study. There were statistically significant decreases in wound surface area observed in all groups (p<0.05) while MES showed the highest mean percentage of reduction in wound surface. MES and NPWT both showed the lowest values for bacterial growth but NPWT was superior in colony count reduction. For LoS, both MES and NPWT showed the lowest mean value.
From the findings of this study, MES was more effective in decreasing wound surface area in burn wounds while NPWT was more effective in reducing bacterial growth.
比较负压伤口治疗(NPWT)与微电流电刺激(MES)对烧伤患者伤口表面积、住院时间(LoS)和伤口菌落计数的疗效。
将热皮肤烧伤面积占全身表面积25%-40%的患者纳入本临床试验。参与者被随机分为三组,每组人数相等:接受NPWT的患者、接受MES的患者和接受标准伤口护理的对照组。除了相同的护理和医疗护理外,所有组均接受相同的传统物理治疗方案。在所有组中,在热烧伤损伤后72小时(术前)、研究开始后10天和21天时测量伤口表面积、菌落计数和LoS。
共有45名患者参与研究。所有组的伤口表面积均有统计学意义的下降(p<0.05),而MES显示伤口表面积减少的平均百分比最高。MES和NPWT的细菌生长值均最低,但NPWT在菌落计数减少方面更具优势。对于LoS,MES和NPWT均显示出最低平均值。
从本研究结果来看,MES在减少烧伤创面面积方面更有效,而NPWT在减少细菌生长方面更有效。