ArticleInternational wound journal2020
The biomechanical efficacy of a dressing with a soft cellulose fluff core in prophylactic use.
Article in International wound journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Moisture-Responsive Friction Adaptability: Rethinking the Conventional Skin Silicone Interfaces in Pressure Injury Prevention Dressing Designs.International wound journal · 2026Article
- The frictional energy absorber effectiveness and its impact on the pressure ulcer prevention performance of multilayer dressings.International wound journal · 2024Review
- Mechanical and contact characteristics of foam materials within wound dressings: Theoretical and practical considerations in treatment.International wound journal · 2023Article
- The biomechanical efficacy of a dressing with a soft cellulose fluff core in protecting prone surgical patients from chest injuries on the operating table.International wound journal · 2022Article
- Alternatives and preferences for materials in use for pressure ulcer prevention: An experiment-reinforced literature review.International wound journal · 2022Article
- The biomechanical efficacy of a hydrogel-based dressing in preventing facial medical device-related pressure ulcers.International wound journal · 2022Article
- What makes a hydrogel-based dressing advantageous for the prevention of medical device-related pressure ulcers.International wound journal · 2022Article
- Evaluation of facial tissue stresses under medical devices post application of a cyanoacrylate liquid skin protectant: An integrated experimental-computational study.International wound journal · 2022Article
- The biomechanical efficacy of a dressing with a soft cellulose fluff core in prophylactic use.International wound journal · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this work, we developed an experimental-computational analysis framework which facilitated objective, quantitative, standardised, methodological, and systematic comparisons between the biomechanical efficacies of two fundamentally different dressing technologies for pressure ulcer prevention: A dressing technology based on cellulose fibres used as the core matrix was evaluated vs the conventional silicone-foam dressing design concept, which was represented by multiple products which belong in this category. Using an anatomically-realistic computer (finite element) model of a supine female patient to whom the different sacral dressings have been applied virtually, we quantitatively evaluated the efficacy of the different dressings by means of a set of 3 biomechanical indices: The protective efficacy index, the protective endurance, and the prophylactic trade-off design parameter. Prior rigorous experimental measurements of the physical and mechanical behaviours and properties of each tested dressing, including tensile, compressive, and friction properties, have been conducted and used as inputs for the computer modelling. Each dressing was evaluated for its tissue protection performances at a new (from the package) state, as well as after exposure to moisture conditions simulating wet bedsheets. Our results demonstrated that the dressing with the fluff core is at least as-good as silicone-foams but importantly, provides the best balance between protective performances at its "new" condition and the performance after being exposed to moisture. We conclude that preventative dressings are not equal in their prophylactic performances, but rather, the base technology, the ingredients, and their arrangement in the dressing structure shape the quality of the delivered tissue protection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.