Ensayo clínico aleatorizado de dos lesiones diferentes por materiales…(Inglés)

Sirpa Harle RNa, , , Anu Korhonen RNa, Jyrki A. Kettunen PT, PhDb and Seppo Seitsalo MD, PhDa

aORTON Orthopaedic Hospital, Invalid Foundation, Tenholantie 10, FIN-00280, Helsinki, Finland bORTON Research Institute, Helsinki, Finland

Editor’s comment This fundamental but essential exploratory randomised controlled trial addresses many issues surrounding the postoperative dressing of orthopaedic wounds. The results indicate a rethinking of what many orthopaedic nurses and surgeons take for granted or never give the time to think about or research.. Available online 10 November 2005.

Summary

This randomised controlled trial compared the clinical and economic effects of two different dressing materials in patients undergoing hip replacement surgery. The participants were randomised into group A (N = 50), in which the dressing material was a modern hydrofibre dressing (Aquacel) applied with adhesive polyurethane film or group B (N = 50), in which the dressing was a conventional wound pad dressing with fibre tape fixation. At the first change of dressing, 59% of the patients in group A had wound area reactions (blister, erythema, oedema, skin injury and haematoma) whereas the corresponding number in group B was 81% (P = 0.02). The average dressing material costs per patient by the third postoperative day were €14.70 in group A and €8.70 in group B (P < 0.01). However, the dressing material costs represented only about 0.02% of the total cost of hip replacement surgery. It is concluded that the modern hydrofibre dressing with polyurethane film fixation treats the surgical wound after hip replacement surgery better than a traditional wound pad dressing with fibre tape fixation.