Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32869507›Full record

ArticleInternational wound journal2020

The biomechanical efficacy of a dressing with a soft cellulose fluff core in prophylactic use.

Amit Gefen, Maja Krämer, Maik Brehm, Sören Burckardt

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Amit GefenDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0223-7218
Maja KrämerPaul Hartmann AG, Wound Management Development Technology Platforms, Germany.
Maik BrehmMerkle & Partner GbR - Ingenieurbüro für Simulation und Entwicklung, Germany.
Sören BurckardtMerkle & Partner GbR - Ingenieurbüro für Simulation und Entwicklung, Germany.
Hartmann Group (Germany) · DETel Aviv University · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

CellulosePressure UlcerBandagesFemaleHumansPressureSacrococcygeal RegionCellulosefinite element modelmoisturepressure injurypressure ulcerprevention

Identifiers

PMID32869507
PMCPMC7948878
OpenAlexW3082500105

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.