Effectiveness of Hydrocolloid Dressings for Treating Pressure Ulcers in Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author:

Kamińska Magdalena SylwiaORCID,Cybulska Anna MariaORCID,Skonieczna-Żydecka KarolinaORCID,Augustyniuk Katarzyna,Grochans ElżbietaORCID,Karakiewicz Beata

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of hydrocolloid dressings in the treatment of grade I, II, III, and IV pressure ulcers in adult patients. We compared the therapeutic effects of hydrocolloids and alternative dressings in pressure ulcer treatment. We conducted a systematic review, using a literature search only in English, from database inception until 20 April 2020, to identify randomized trials comparing various types of dressings applied in the healing of pressure ulcers. The databases were PubMed, Embase, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL). The study selection was performed independently by two reviewers. Data were extracted based on the guidelines included in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol. The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed using a standardized critical appraisal instrument developed by the Cochrane Collaboration. Random-effect meta-analysis of data from three or more studies was performed using meta-analysis software (Comprehensive Meta-Analysis V3, Biostat, New Jersey, USA). A total of 1145 records were identified, of which 223 were qualified after further verification, of which eight were finally included in further analysis. Hydrocolloid dressings were not superior to control therapeutics (p = 0.839; Z = 0.203; CI 95%: 0.791–1.334). They were not associated with higher healing rates (p = 0.718; Z = 0.361; OR: 0.067; CI 95%: 0.297–0.431), nor did they decrease the incidence of adverse events compared with control therapeutics (p = 0.300; Z = −1.036; OR: 0.067; CI 95%: 0.394–1.333). In the above cases, Egger’s test also did not indicate publication bias (t value = 0.779, p = 0.465; t value = 1.198, p = 0.442; t value = 0.834, p = 0.465, respectively). The present meta-analysis shows that hydrocolloid dressings are not significantly better than alternative ones in the healing of pressure ulcers in adult patients.

Publisher

MDPI AG

Subject

Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Reference33 articles.

1. European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel and Pan Pacific Pressure Injury Alliance (NPUAP/EPUAP/PPPIA),2014

2. Pressure ulcers: Pathophysiology, epidemiology, risk factors, and presentation

3. Pressure Ulcers: Prevalence, Incidence, and Implications for the Future;Pieper,2013

4. The relationship between common risk factors and the pathology of pressure ulcer development: a systematic review

5. Pressure ulcer prevalence and cost in the U.S. population

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3