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
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 o...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Faculdade de Medicina / USP
|
Series: | Clinics |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1807-59322017001200737&lng=en&tlng=en |
id |
doaj-9abdbac193924357ac5a7b0a83b3cad5 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-9abdbac193924357ac5a7b0a83b3cad52020-11-25T03:24:43ZengFaculdade de Medicina / USPClinics1980-5322721273774210.6061/clinics/2017(12)04S1807-59322017001200737A 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 trialFabio KamamotoAna Lucia Munhoz LimaMarcelo Rosa de RezendeRames Mattar-JuniorMarcos de Camargo LeonhardtKodi Edson KojimaCarla Chineze dos SantosOBJECTIVES: 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.http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1807-59322017001200737&lng=en&tlng=enNegative-Pressure Wound TherapyWound HealingWounds and InjuriesCost Savings |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Fabio Kamamoto Ana Lucia Munhoz Lima Marcelo Rosa de Rezende Rames Mattar-Junior Marcos de Camargo Leonhardt Kodi Edson Kojima Carla Chineze dos Santos |
spellingShingle |
Fabio Kamamoto Ana Lucia Munhoz Lima Marcelo Rosa de Rezende Rames Mattar-Junior Marcos de Camargo Leonhardt Kodi Edson Kojima Carla Chineze dos Santos 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 Clinics Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy Wound Healing Wounds and Injuries Cost Savings |
author_facet |
Fabio Kamamoto Ana Lucia Munhoz Lima Marcelo Rosa de Rezende Rames Mattar-Junior Marcos de Camargo Leonhardt Kodi Edson Kojima Carla Chineze dos Santos |
author_sort |
Fabio Kamamoto |
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 |
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 |
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 |
publisher |
Faculdade de Medicina / USP |
series |
Clinics |
issn |
1980-5322 |
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. |
topic |
Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy Wound Healing Wounds and Injuries Cost Savings |
url |
http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1807-59322017001200737&lng=en&tlng=en |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT fabiokamamoto anewlowcostnegativepressurewoundtherapyversusacommerciallyavailabletherapydevicewidelyusedtotreatcomplextraumaticinjuriesaprospectiverandomizednoninferioritytrial AT analuciamunhozlima anewlowcostnegativepressurewoundtherapyversusacommerciallyavailabletherapydevicewidelyusedtotreatcomplextraumaticinjuriesaprospectiverandomizednoninferioritytrial AT marcelorosaderezende anewlowcostnegativepressurewoundtherapyversusacommerciallyavailabletherapydevicewidelyusedtotreatcomplextraumaticinjuriesaprospectiverandomizednoninferioritytrial AT ramesmattarjunior anewlowcostnegativepressurewoundtherapyversusacommerciallyavailabletherapydevicewidelyusedtotreatcomplextraumaticinjuriesaprospectiverandomizednoninferioritytrial AT marcosdecamargoleonhardt anewlowcostnegativepressurewoundtherapyversusacommerciallyavailabletherapydevicewidelyusedtotreatcomplextraumaticinjuriesaprospectiverandomizednoninferioritytrial AT kodiedsonkojima anewlowcostnegativepressurewoundtherapyversusacommerciallyavailabletherapydevicewidelyusedtotreatcomplextraumaticinjuriesaprospectiverandomizednoninferioritytrial AT carlachinezedossantos anewlowcostnegativepressurewoundtherapyversusacommerciallyavailabletherapydevicewidelyusedtotreatcomplextraumaticinjuriesaprospectiverandomizednoninferioritytrial AT fabiokamamoto newlowcostnegativepressurewoundtherapyversusacommerciallyavailabletherapydevicewidelyusedtotreatcomplextraumaticinjuriesaprospectiverandomizednoninferioritytrial AT analuciamunhozlima newlowcostnegativepressurewoundtherapyversusacommerciallyavailabletherapydevicewidelyusedtotreatcomplextraumaticinjuriesaprospectiverandomizednoninferioritytrial AT marcelorosaderezende newlowcostnegativepressurewoundtherapyversusacommerciallyavailabletherapydevicewidelyusedtotreatcomplextraumaticinjuriesaprospectiverandomizednoninferioritytrial AT ramesmattarjunior newlowcostnegativepressurewoundtherapyversusacommerciallyavailabletherapydevicewidelyusedtotreatcomplextraumaticinjuriesaprospectiverandomizednoninferioritytrial AT marcosdecamargoleonhardt newlowcostnegativepressurewoundtherapyversusacommerciallyavailabletherapydevicewidelyusedtotreatcomplextraumaticinjuriesaprospectiverandomizednoninferioritytrial AT kodiedsonkojima newlowcostnegativepressurewoundtherapyversusacommerciallyavailabletherapydevicewidelyusedtotreatcomplextraumaticinjuriesaprospectiverandomizednoninferioritytrial AT carlachinezedossantos newlowcostnegativepressurewoundtherapyversusacommerciallyavailabletherapydevicewidelyusedtotreatcomplextraumaticinjuriesaprospectiverandomizednoninferioritytrial |
_version_ |
1724600409605013504 |