N/A
N=1,633
Silicone Adhesive Multilayer Foam Dressings to Prevent Pressure Ulcer
Pressure Ulcer
Bottom Line
View on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03442777 ↗Enrolled (actual)
1,633
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Apr 2021
Primary outcome: Primary: Number of Participants Who Developed a New Pressure Ulcer Category 2 or Worse on Sacrum, Heels or Greater Trochanter — 43; 34 Participants — p=0.04
Study Design & Population
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- N/A
- Interventions
- Allevyn® brand silicone adhesive multilayer foam dressings (Device); Mepilex® brand silicone adhesive multilayer foam dressings (Device)
- Age
- Adult, Older Adult · 18+ yrs
- Sex
- All
- Sponsor
- Belgium Health Care Knowledge Centre
- Primary completion
- Dec 2018
Outcome Measures
| Outcome | Result | p-value |
|---|---|---|
| PRIMARY Number of Participants Who Developed a New Pressure Ulcer Category 2 or Worse on Sacrum, Heels or Greater Trochanter |
43; 34 | 0.04 sig |
Summary
The objective of this study is to determine if silicone adhesive multilayer foam dressings applied to the sacrum, heels and greater trochanter in addition to standard prevention reduce pressure ulcer incidence category II, III, IV, Unstageable and Deep Tissue Injury (DTI) compared to standard pressure ulcer prevention alone, in at risk hospitalised patients. In particular, this trial extends previous trial results obtained in ICU setting. Therefore, only a maximum of 25% of patients will be recruited from ICU settings.
The hypothesis is: 'The use of silicone adhesive multilayer foam dressings as adjuvant prophylactic therapy for pressure ulcer prevention is more effective in reducing pressure ulcer category II, III, IV, Unstageable, and Deep Tissue Injury (DTI) incidence rate on sacrum, heels and greater trochanter, compared to standard pressure ulcer prevention alone.' The null hypothesis is: 'The use of silicone adhesive multilayer foam dressings as adjuvant prophylactic therapy for pressure ulcer prevention is not more effective in reducing pressure ulcer category II, III, IV, Unstageable, and Deep Tissue Injury (DTI) incidence rate on sacrum, heels and greater trochanter, compared to standard pressure ulcer prevention alone.
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- At risk for pressure ulcer development based on Braden risk assessment (Braden score ≤17).
- Admitted to hospital within the previous 48 hours. Note: Not more than 25% of patients per site should be recruited at ICU wards.
- Skin at sacrum is assessable and there is no clinically relevant incontinence- associated dermatitis (IAD*) or another skin condition that would be a contra-indication for the application of the devices under study, and there is no pressure ulcer category II or worse present.
*clinically relevant IAD is defined as any of the 4 categories described in the publication http://users.ugent.be/~dibeeckm/globiadnl/nlv1.0.pdf
- For at least 3 of the following 4 skin sites (heel left, heel right, greater trochanter left, greater trochanter right) one of the following two conditions should apply:
- A study dressing can be applied as prevention of a pressure ulcer category II or worse at that skin site (there is no contra-indication)
OR
- There is already a pressure ulcer category II or worse at that skin site.
- Written informed consent by the patient or his/her legal representative.
Exclusion Criteria
- Aged < 18 years.
- The length of stay counting from first day of admission in one or (if the patient is transferred to another ward) more participating wards is < 7 days.
- Both heels amputated
- Previously known/documented allergy for substances used in the devices under study.
- A clinical condition not allowing participation in a clinical study.
- Participation in another interventional clinical trial.
- Patients who exceptionally receive or are planned to receive a dressing for the prevention of pressure ulcers at sacrum, heels and trochanters based on best medical judgment and outside of the surgery setting.
Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03442777). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.