P. Amione, E. Ricci, F. Topo, L. Izzo, R. Pirovano, V. Rega, C. Cocci, M. Masina
Journal of Wound Care, Vol. 14, Iss. 8, 01 Sep 2005, pp 365
- 370
Objective: The primary objective was to assess dressing delamination and the ensuing potential consequences during wear and/or removal, as well as the effect of residue remaining in the ulcer following foam breakdown.
Method: In this prospective multicentre study, 32 patients with a grade II or III pressure ulcer were randomised to receive either Allevyn Adhesive or Biatain Adhesive dressing. The performance of the dressings was assessed over seven dressing changes or a maximum of six weeks. The primary efficacy variable was the proportion of patients with at least one delaminated dressing (delamination being defined as the falling apart of a dressing during wear or removal, or the presence of residue from the dressing in the ulcer).
Results: Allevyn Adhesive was significantly less likely to delaminate than Biatain Adhesive: 83% of patients given Biatain Adhesive had a dressing that delaminated compared with 14% for Allevyn Adhesive (p=0.014). Furthermore, a greater proportion of the Biatain Adhesive dressings delaminated compared with the Allevyn Adhesive dressings: 50% versus 4% (p<0.001). Allevyn Adhesive performed
significantly better in the following parameters: handling exudate (p=0.044), comfort (p=0.007), ease of application (p=0.004), conformability during application (p=0.003) and removal (p<0.0001), and adherence to the skin during application (p=0.003) and prior to removal (p=0.011). Three patients given Allevyn Adhesive (21%) reported three adverse events; six patients given Biatain Adhesive (33%) reported eight adverse events.
Conclusion: Allevyn Adhesive is effective and well tolerated in the management of pressure ulcers and less likely to delaminate than Biatain Adhesive.
Declaration of interest: This study was funded by Smith & Nephew Wound Management Division, Hull, UK.
To view this article
