Department of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Tel Aviv University Tel Aviv 6997801, Israel.
J Wound Care. 2020 Dec 1;29(Sup12):S6-S15. doi: 10.12968/jowc.2020.29.Sup12.S6.
The objective of this educational article is to explain in non-technical terms how the engineering considerations in the design of prophylactic dressings for pressure ulcer (PU, also known as pressure injury) prevention eventually determine the associated clinical and cost-benefit outcomes. The article specifically describes a bioengineering algorithm for quantitative evaluation of the biomechanical efficacy of different prophylactic dressing designs, which is exemplified for two fundamentally different dressing technologies, one based on superabsorbent cellulose core versus the conventional silicone-foam dressing design. A set of three biomechanical indices is described and employed for the above comparative evaluation, namely, the protective efficacy index, the protective endurance and the prophylactic trade-off design parameter. It is demonstrated that the dressing with the superabsorbent cellulose core is at least as good as silicone-foams but, importantly, provides a good balance between its protective performance in its 'new' condition, as opposed to its 'used' condition, i.e., after being exposed to moisture. Most notably, we show that preventative dressings are never equal in their performances; the underlying structure and the dressing ingredients together determine the extent of the delivered tissue protection and its durability.
本文旨在用通俗易懂的语言解释在预防压力性溃疡（PU，也称为压力损伤）的预防性敷料设计中工程学考量如何最终决定相关的临床和成本效益结果。本文特别描述了一种用于定量评估不同预防性敷料设计的生物力学效果的生物工程算法，该算法以两种根本不同的敷料技术为例进行了说明，一种是基于高吸水性纤维素芯，另一种是传统的硅酮泡沫敷料设计。本文描述并使用了一组三个生物力学指标进行上述比较评估，即保护效果指数、保护耐久性和预防性权衡设计参数。结果表明，具有高吸水性纤维素芯的敷料至少与硅酮泡沫一样好，但重要的是，它在“新”状态（即暴露于水分之前）和“使用”状态（即暴露于水分之后）之间提供了良好的保护性能平衡。值得注意的是，我们表明预防性敷料的性能从不相同；底层结构和敷料成分共同决定了所提供的组织保护程度及其耐久性。
