title: A prospective, randomized, multisite clinical evaluation of a transparent absorbent acrylic dressing and a hydrocolloid dressing in the management of Stage II and shallow Stage III pressure ulcers.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To compare clinical performance of a transparent absorbent acrylic dressing (3M Tegaderm Absorbent Clear Acrylic Dressing ]TAAD[; 3M Company, St Paul, MN) and a hydrocolloid dressing (HD ]DuoDERM CGF, ConvaTec, ER Squibb & Sons, Princeton, NJ[) in the management of Stage II and shallow Stage III pressure ulcers.
  
  
  METHODS
  Prospective, open-label, randomized, comparative, multisite clinical evaluation. Patients were followed up for a maximum of 56 days or until their ulcer healed. At weekly intervals, investigators conducted wound assessments and dressing performance evaluations.
  
  
  METHODS
  Wound care clinics, home care, and long-term care.
  
  
  METHODS
  Thirty-five patients received the TAAD, and 37 received the HD.
  
  
  METHODS
  Dressing performance assessments, patient comfort, dressing wear time, and wound healing were measured.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The majority of investigator assessments favored the TAAD. Considerations given included the ability to center dressings over the ulcer (P = .005), ability to assess the ulcer before (P < .001) and after (P < .001) absorption, barrier properties (P = .039), patient comfort during removal (P < .001), overall patient comfort (P = .048), conformability before (P = .026) and after (P = .001) absorption, ease of removal (P < .001), nonadherence to wound bed (P < .001), residue in the wound (P = .002), residue on periwound skin (P < .001), and odor after absorption (P = .016). Overall satisfaction favored the TAAD (P < .001), and a high value was placed on its transparent feature (P < .001). Mean (SD) wear time for the TAAD was 5.7 (2.55) days compared with 4.7 (2.29) days for the HD (P = .086). This 1-day difference in wear time was clinically noticeable by the investigators (P = .035). Wound closure for the 2 dressing groups was nearly identical (P = .9627).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Performance results favored the TAAD over the HD as standard treatment for Stage II and shallow Stage III pressure ulcers.
authors.affiliation: Etris Associates, Inc, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
authors.forename: Marie
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Brown-Etris
authors.forename: Catherine
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Milne
authors.forename: Heather
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Orsted
authors.forename: Judy L
authors.initials: JL
authors.lastname: Gates
authors.forename: Debra
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Netsch
authors.forename: Marion
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Punchello
authors.forename: Nancy
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Couture
authors.forename: Martine
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Albert
authors.forename: Edie
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Attrell
authors.forename: Julie
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Freyberg
mesh_terms: D000179:Acrylates; D000368:Aged; D047070:Bandages, Hydrocolloid; D003646:Debridement / Q000379:methods*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D009779:Occlusive Dressings; D010549:Personal Satisfaction; D003668:Pressure Ulcer / Q000451:nursing / Q000628:therapy*; D011446:Prospective Studies; D013997:Time Factors; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014945:Wound Healing
chemical_list: D000179:Acrylates