科研之友
微信
新浪微博
Facebook
分享链接
摘要
Objective: This study looks at six different modern wound dressings to investigate how likely they are to cause skin stripping and impairment of the skin's barrier function.
Method: Healthy volunteers had each dressing applied, removed and reapplied to the skin on their back over the study period of 15 days. Skin barrier function was investigated using the amount of transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and then related to the amount of skin stripping, investigated by measuring stained skin removal, the thickness of the stratum corneum after treatment, and the amount of skin attached to the removed dressings. General signs of trauma, such as skin dryness and erythema, were investigated by subjective and objective parameters.
Results:TEWL values measured on the untreated test area, as well as after application of Urgotul Trio, remained relatively unchanged and Mepilex Border decreased slightly (similar to 1g/m(2)/h), while all other dressings displayed an increased in TEWL:Allevyn Adhesive (5g/m(2)/h),Versiva XC (14g/m(2)/h),Comfeel Plus (22g/m(2)/h) and Biatain (28g/m(2)/h). By the end of the study, only the untreated area (mean 43% dye remaining), Mepilex Border (76%) and Urgotul Trio (34%) areas had visible dye remaining. It is interesting to note that the untreated site had a colour change, suggesting loss of stratum corneum, due to the shedding of skin cells from the surface. The increase in total skin colour for Comfeel Plus and Biatain after day 8 might be assigned to an increased redness due to erythema. All the dressings showed evidence of stratum corneum attached to the adhesive, except Mepilex Border,which appeared to be free of any attached stratum corneum.
Conclusion: Overall the best performance in terms of skin protection and failure to cause skin trauma was found to be for Mepilex Border.
Conflict of interest: This project was funded by a grant from Molnlycke Healthcare Ltd.
- 出版日期2011-9
