A new low-cost negative-pressure wound therapy versus a commercially available therapy device widely used to treat complex traumatic injuries: a prospective, randomized, non-inferiority trial
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2017 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Clinics |
Texto Completo: | https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/142551 |
Resumo: | OBJECTIVES: Negative-pressure wound therapy has been widely adopted to reduce the complexity of treating a broad range of acute and chronic wounds. However, its cost is high. The objective of this study was to evaluate the following two different methods of negative-pressure wound therapy in terms of healing time: a low-cost method of negative-pressure wound therapy (a pressure stabilizer device connected to a hospital wall-vacuum system with a gauze-sealed dressing, USP) and the standard of care (vacuum-assisted closure, VAC). METHODS: This is a randomized, controlled, non-inferiority, unblinded trial. Patients admitted with complex injuries to a trauma center in a public referral hospital who were indicated for orthopedic surgery were randomized to a USP or VAC group. The primary outcome was the time required to achieve a “ready for surgery condition”, which was defined as a wound bed with healthy granulation tissue and without necrosis or purulent secretion. Wound bed area contraction, granulation tissue growth and the direct costs of the dressings were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Variation in area and granulation tissue growth were essentially the same between the systems, and healing time was equal between the groups (p=0.379). In both systems, serial debridement increased wound area (p=0.934), and granulation tissue was also increased (p=0.408). The mean treatment cost was US$ 15.15 in the USP group and US$ 872.59 in the VAC group. CONCLUSIONS: For treating complex traumatic injuries, USP was non-inferior to and less expensive than VAC. |
id |
USP-19_4d1ab11ed276ec43fe3a5a9285bc4e2d |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:revistas.usp.br:article/142551 |
network_acronym_str |
USP-19 |
network_name_str |
Clinics |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
A new low-cost negative-pressure wound therapy versus a commercially available therapy device widely used to treat complex traumatic injuries: a prospective, randomized, non-inferiority trialNegative-Pressure Wound TherapyWound HealingWounds and InjuriesCost SavingsOBJECTIVES: Negative-pressure wound therapy has been widely adopted to reduce the complexity of treating a broad range of acute and chronic wounds. However, its cost is high. The objective of this study was to evaluate the following two different methods of negative-pressure wound therapy in terms of healing time: a low-cost method of negative-pressure wound therapy (a pressure stabilizer device connected to a hospital wall-vacuum system with a gauze-sealed dressing, USP) and the standard of care (vacuum-assisted closure, VAC). METHODS: This is a randomized, controlled, non-inferiority, unblinded trial. Patients admitted with complex injuries to a trauma center in a public referral hospital who were indicated for orthopedic surgery were randomized to a USP or VAC group. The primary outcome was the time required to achieve a “ready for surgery condition”, which was defined as a wound bed with healthy granulation tissue and without necrosis or purulent secretion. Wound bed area contraction, granulation tissue growth and the direct costs of the dressings were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Variation in area and granulation tissue growth were essentially the same between the systems, and healing time was equal between the groups (p=0.379). In both systems, serial debridement increased wound area (p=0.934), and granulation tissue was also increased (p=0.408). The mean treatment cost was US$ 15.15 in the USP group and US$ 872.59 in the VAC group. CONCLUSIONS: For treating complex traumatic injuries, USP was non-inferior to and less expensive than VAC.Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo2017-12-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/14255110.6061/clinics/2017(12)04Clinics; Vol. 72 No. 12 (2017); 737-742Clinics; v. 72 n. 12 (2017); 737-742Clinics; Vol. 72 Núm. 12 (2017); 737-7421980-53221807-5932reponame:Clinicsinstname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPenghttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/142551/137584Copyright (c) 2018 Clinicsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessKamamoto, FabioLima, Ana Lucia MunhozRezende, Marcelo Rosa deMattar-Junior, RamesLeonhardt, Marcos de CamargoKojima, Kodi EdsonSantos, Carla Chineze dos2018-01-23T10:06:01Zoai:revistas.usp.br:article/142551Revistahttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinicsPUBhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/oai||clinics@hc.fm.usp.br1980-53221807-5932opendoar:2018-01-23T10:06:01Clinics - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
A new low-cost negative-pressure wound therapy versus a commercially available therapy device widely used to treat complex traumatic injuries: a prospective, randomized, non-inferiority trial |
title |
A new low-cost negative-pressure wound therapy versus a commercially available therapy device widely used to treat complex traumatic injuries: a prospective, randomized, non-inferiority trial |
spellingShingle |
A new low-cost negative-pressure wound therapy versus a commercially available therapy device widely used to treat complex traumatic injuries: a prospective, randomized, non-inferiority trial Kamamoto, Fabio Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy Wound Healing Wounds and Injuries Cost Savings |
title_short |
A new low-cost negative-pressure wound therapy versus a commercially available therapy device widely used to treat complex traumatic injuries: a prospective, randomized, non-inferiority trial |
title_full |
A new low-cost negative-pressure wound therapy versus a commercially available therapy device widely used to treat complex traumatic injuries: a prospective, randomized, non-inferiority trial |
title_fullStr |
A new low-cost negative-pressure wound therapy versus a commercially available therapy device widely used to treat complex traumatic injuries: a prospective, randomized, non-inferiority trial |
title_full_unstemmed |
A new low-cost negative-pressure wound therapy versus a commercially available therapy device widely used to treat complex traumatic injuries: a prospective, randomized, non-inferiority trial |
title_sort |
A new low-cost negative-pressure wound therapy versus a commercially available therapy device widely used to treat complex traumatic injuries: a prospective, randomized, non-inferiority trial |
author |
Kamamoto, Fabio |
author_facet |
Kamamoto, Fabio Lima, Ana Lucia Munhoz Rezende, Marcelo Rosa de Mattar-Junior, Rames Leonhardt, Marcos de Camargo Kojima, Kodi Edson Santos, Carla Chineze dos |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Lima, Ana Lucia Munhoz Rezende, Marcelo Rosa de Mattar-Junior, Rames Leonhardt, Marcos de Camargo Kojima, Kodi Edson Santos, Carla Chineze dos |
author2_role |
author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Kamamoto, Fabio Lima, Ana Lucia Munhoz Rezende, Marcelo Rosa de Mattar-Junior, Rames Leonhardt, Marcos de Camargo Kojima, Kodi Edson Santos, Carla Chineze dos |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy Wound Healing Wounds and Injuries Cost Savings |
topic |
Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy Wound Healing Wounds and Injuries Cost Savings |
description |
OBJECTIVES: Negative-pressure wound therapy has been widely adopted to reduce the complexity of treating a broad range of acute and chronic wounds. However, its cost is high. The objective of this study was to evaluate the following two different methods of negative-pressure wound therapy in terms of healing time: a low-cost method of negative-pressure wound therapy (a pressure stabilizer device connected to a hospital wall-vacuum system with a gauze-sealed dressing, USP) and the standard of care (vacuum-assisted closure, VAC). METHODS: This is a randomized, controlled, non-inferiority, unblinded trial. Patients admitted with complex injuries to a trauma center in a public referral hospital who were indicated for orthopedic surgery were randomized to a USP or VAC group. The primary outcome was the time required to achieve a “ready for surgery condition”, which was defined as a wound bed with healthy granulation tissue and without necrosis or purulent secretion. Wound bed area contraction, granulation tissue growth and the direct costs of the dressings were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Variation in area and granulation tissue growth were essentially the same between the systems, and healing time was equal between the groups (p=0.379). In both systems, serial debridement increased wound area (p=0.934), and granulation tissue was also increased (p=0.408). The mean treatment cost was US$ 15.15 in the USP group and US$ 872.59 in the VAC group. CONCLUSIONS: For treating complex traumatic injuries, USP was non-inferior to and less expensive than VAC. |
publishDate |
2017 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2017-12-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/142551 10.6061/clinics/2017(12)04 |
url |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/142551 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.6061/clinics/2017(12)04 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/142551/137584 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2018 Clinics info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2018 Clinics |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Clinics; Vol. 72 No. 12 (2017); 737-742 Clinics; v. 72 n. 12 (2017); 737-742 Clinics; Vol. 72 Núm. 12 (2017); 737-742 1980-5322 1807-5932 reponame:Clinics instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP) instacron:USP |
instname_str |
Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
instacron_str |
USP |
institution |
USP |
reponame_str |
Clinics |
collection |
Clinics |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Clinics - Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||clinics@hc.fm.usp.br |
_version_ |
1800222763631247360 |