Skip to main content

Dressings for Chronic and Acute Wounds

  • Chapter
Surgery in Wounds
  • 518 Accesses

Abstract

Since antiquity, dressings have formed an integral part of the art of treating wounds. Earlier than 2000 B.CSumerian writings described dressings based on plants, mud, milk, wine, beer, oil and flour. In 1550 B.C., the Egyptians used plant fibres for their absorbent qualities, as well as honey and fats, inventing the first greasy dressings. They often used bandages as a means of holding these dressings in place.The same products were indeed used over subsequent centuries. In the 19th century, Semmelweis, Pasteur and Lister participated in the development of antiseptics and thought they could prevent infection by keeping a wound as dry as possible: at that time, the purpose of dressings was therefore to absorb and eliminate all traces of exudate and moisture. This concept was finally called into question by the studies of Winter [46] and Hinman [17] during the 1960s, who demonstrated again what the Egyptians had known already: the beneficial effects of a moist environment on healing. During the second half of the 20th century, it was technological advances in polymers, adhesives and textiles which were the source of intensive research and development into modern dressings.Thus the introduction of hydrocolloids represented a real revolution in the treatment of all types of wounds. However, for some heavily exuding wounds, they do not enable the optimum control of exudate. It is, then, necessary to use more absorbent polymers: alginates, foams or hydrofibres. Similarly, some little-exuding wounds require an input of moisture, which today is possible thanks to the development of hydrogel dressings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alm A, Hornmark AM, Fall PA (1989) Care of pressure sores: a controlled study of the use of hydro-colloid dressing compared with wet saline gauze compresses. Acta Dermatol Venereol (Stockh) 149 [Suppl]: 1–10

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Apelqvist J, Larsson J, Stenstrom A (1990) Topical treatment of necrotic foot ulcers in diabetic patients: a comparative trial of Duoderm and MeZinc. Br J Derm 123: 787–792

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bale S, Baker N, Crook H, Rayman A, Rayman G, Harding KG (2001) Exploring the use of an alginate dressing for diabetic foot ulcers. J Wound Care. 10: 81–84

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Barnett A, Berkowitz RL, Mills R, Vitnes LM (1983) Comparison of synthetic adhesive moisture vapor permeable and fine mesh gauze dressings for split skin graft donor sites. Am J Surg 145: 379–381

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Basse P, Slim E, Lohmann M (1992) Treatment of donor sites: calcium alginate versus paraffin gauze. Acta Chir Plast 34: 92–98

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Belmin J, Meaume S, Rabus MT, Bohbot S (2002) Sequential treatment with calcium alginate dressings and hydrocolloid dressings accelerates pressure ulcer healing in older subjects: a multicenter randomized trial of sequential versus nonsequential treatment with hydrocolloid dressings alone. J Am Geriatr Soc 50: 269–274

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Brandrup F, Menne T, Agren M (1990) A randomized trial of two occlusive dressings in the treatment of leg ulcers. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 70: 231–235

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Caruso DM, Foster KN, Hermans MH, Rick C (2004) Aquacel Ag in the management of partial-thickness burns: results of a clinical trial. J Burn Care Rehabil 25: 89–97

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Colin D, Kurring PA, Yvon C (1996) Managing sloughy pressure sores. J Wound Care 5: 444–446

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Dawson C, Armstrong MWJ, Fulford SCV, Fauqi RM, Galland RB (1992) Use of calcium alginate to pack abcess cavities: a control clinical trial. J Royal Coll Surg 37: 177–179

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Eisenberg M (1986) The effect of occlusiv dressings on reepithelialization of wounds in children with epidermolysis bullosa. J Pediatr Surg 21: 892–894

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Freshwater MF, Su CT, Hoopes JE (1978) A comparison of polyurethane foam dressing and fine mesh gauze in the healing of donor sites. Plast Reconstr Surg 61: 275–276

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Friedman SJ, Daniel SU (1984) Management of leg ulcers with hydrocolloid occlusive dressing. Arch Derm 120: 1329–1336

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Hampson JP (1996) The use of metronidazole in the treatment of malodorous wounds. J Wound Care 5: 421–426

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Handfield-Jones SE, Grattan CEH (1988) Comparison of a hydrocolloid dressing and paraffin gauze in the treatment of venous ulcers. Br J Derm 118: 425–427

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Hermans MHE, Hermans RP (1986) Duoderm, an alternative dressing for smaller burns. Burns 12: 214–219

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Hinman CC (1963) Effect of air exposure and occlusion on experimental human skin wound. Nature 200: 377–379

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Holloway S, Bale S, Harding K, Robinson B, Ballard K (2002) Evaluating the effectiveness of a dressing for use in malodorous, exuding wounds. Ostomy Wound Manage 48: 22–28

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Innes ME, Umraw N, Fish JS, Gomez M, Cartotto RC (2001) The use of silver coated dressings on donor site wounds: a prospective, controlled matched pair study. Burns 27: 621–627

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Karlsmark T, Agerslev RH, Bendz SH, Larsen JR, Roed-Petersen J, Andersen KE (2003) Clinical performance of a new silver dressing, Contreet Foam, for chronic exuding venous leg ulcers. J Wound Care 12: 351–354

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Lawrence JE, Blake GB (1991) A comparison of calcium alginate and scarlet red dressings in the healing of split thickness skin graft donor sites. Br J Plast Surg 44: 247–249

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Limova M, Troyer-Caudle J (2002) Controlled, randomized clinical trial of 2 hydrocolloid dressings in the management of venous insufficiency ulcers. J Vase Nurs 20: 22–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Loiterman DA, Byers PH (1991) Effect of a hydrocellular polyurethane dressing on chronic venous ulcer healing. Wounds 3: 178–181

    Google Scholar 

  24. Meaume S, Van De Looverbosch D, Heyman H, Romanelli M, Ciangherotti A, Charpin S (2003)y to compare a new self-adherent soft silicone dressing with a self-adherent polymer dressing in stage II pressure ulcers. Ostomy Wound Manage. 49:44–51

    Google Scholar 

  25. Meaume S, Senet P, Dumas R, Carsin H, Pannier M, Bohbot S (2002)1: a novel non-adherent lipidocolloid dressing. Br J Nurs 11 [Suppl 16] S42–43, S46–50

    Google Scholar 

  26. Meuleneire F (2002) Using a soft silicone-coated net dressing to manage skin tears. J Wound Care 11: 365–369

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Milburn PB, Zinger JC, Milburn MA (1989) Treatment of scleroderma skin ulcers with a hydrocolloid membrane. J Am Acad Derm (Part 1) 21: 200–204

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Muller G, Winkler Y, Kramer A (2003) Antibacterial activity and endotoxin-binding capacity of Actisorb Silver 220. J Hosp Infect 53: 211–214

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Neal DE, Whalley PC, Flowers MW, Wilson DH (1981) The effects of an adherent polyurethane film and conventional absorbent dressing in patients with small partial thickness burns. Br J Clin Pract 35: 254–257

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Nemeth AJ, Eaglstein WH, Taylor JR, Peerson LJ, Falanga V (1991) Faster healing and less pain in skin biopsy site treated with occlusive dressing. Arch Derm 127: 1679–1683

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Nielsen PG, Madsen SM, Stromberg L (1990) Treatment of chronic leg ulcers with a hydro colloid dressing. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 152 [Suppl]: 1–12

    Google Scholar 

  32. Oleske DM, Smith XP, White P, Pottage J, Donovan MI (1986) A randomized clinical trial of two dressing methods for treatment of low-grade pressure ulcers. JET 13: 90–98

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Ortonne JP (1996) A controlled study of the activity of hyaluronic acid in the treatment of venous leg ulcers. J Dermatol Treat 7: 75–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Phillips TJ, Kapoor V, Provan A, Ellerin T (1993) A randomized prospective study of a hydroactive dressing vs. conventional treatment after shave biopsy excision. Arch Derm 129: 859–860

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Pometan JP, Chanut MC, Alia P (1989) Flore bactérienne et escarre. Le moniteur Hospitalier 11: 3–4

    Google Scholar 

  36. Porter JM (1991) A comparative investigation of reepithelialization of split skin graft donor areas after application of hydrocolloid and alginate dressings. Br. J Plast Surg 44: 333–377

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Sayag J, Meaume S, Bohbot S (1996) Healing properties of calcium alginate dressings. J Wound Care 5: 357–362

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Thomas DR, Goode PS, LaMaster K, Tennyson T, Parnell LK (1999) A comparison of an opaque foam dressing versus a transparent film dressing in the management of skin tears in institutionalized subjects. Ostomy Wound Manage 45: 22–24, 27–28

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Thomas DW, Hill CM, Lewis MA, Stephens P, Walker R, Von Der Weth A (2000) Randomized clinical trial of the effect of semi-occlusive dressings on the microflora and clinical outcome of acute facial wounds. Wound Repair Regen 8: 258–263

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Thomas S, McCubbin P (2003) An in vitro analysis of the antimicrobial properties of 10 silver-containing dressings. J Wound Care 12: 305–308

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Veves A, Sheehan P, Pham HT (2002) A randomized, controlled trial of Promogran (a collagen/oxidized regenerated cellulose dressing) vs. standard treatment in the management of diabetic foot ulcers. Arch Surg 137: 822–827

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Viciano V, Castera JE, Medrano J, Aguilo J, Torro J, Botella MG, Toldra N (2000) Effect of hydrocolloid dressings on healing by second intention after excision of pilonidal sinus. Eur J Surg 166: 229–232

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Vin F, Teot L, Meaume S (2002) The healing properties of Promogran in venous leg ulcers. J Wound Care 11: 335–341

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Vloemans AF, Soesman AM, Kreis RW, Middelkoop E (2001) A newly developed hydrofibre dressing, in the treatment of partial-thickness burns. Burns 27: 167–173

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Von Lindern JJ, Niederhagen B, Appel T, Berge S (2002) Treatment of soft tissue defects with exposed bone in the head and face region with alginates and hydrocolloid dressings. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 60: 1126–1130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Winter GD (1963) Effect of air drying and dressings on the surface of wounds. Nature 197: 91–93

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Wyatt D, Mc Gowan DN, Najarian MP (1990) Comparison of a hydrocolloid dressing and silver sulfadiazine cream in the outpatient management of second-degree burns. J Trauma 30: 857–865

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Xakellis GC, Chrischillis EA (1992) Hydrocolloid versus saline-gauze dressings in treating pressure ulcers: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehab 73: 463–468

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Zuccarelli FA (1992) A comparativ study of the hydrocellular polyurethane dressing Allevyn and the hydrocolloid dressing Duoderm in the treatment of leg ulcers. Phlebologie 45: 529–533

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Meaume, S. (2004). Dressings for Chronic and Acute Wounds. In: Téot, L., Banwell, P.E., Ziegler, U.E. (eds) Surgery in Wounds. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-59307-9_15

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-59307-9_15

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-63929-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-59307-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics