Skip to main content
Poster LR-01

A methodology for assessing pressure distribution properties of advanced wound care dressings at clinically relevant loads

It is widely recognized that one of the key contributing factors to pressure injury occurrence is deformation of skin and underlying tissue as a result of direct sustained pressure, associated with periods of patient inactivity1. Clinicians and caregivers are increasingly using foam wound dressings to buffer these forces, providing localized cushioning and pressure redistribution properties as part of a prophylactic pressure injury prevention protocol2,3.    Whilst there are multiple studies associated with pressure redistribution properties of such dressings, few were conducted using clinically relevant loads.  A novel laboratory test method has been established to assess pressure redistribution properties of commercially available wound dressings at clinically relevant loads.  The test method features a pressure mat to measure peak pressure, a subcutaneous fat analogue, a skin analogue and weights fabricated to apply a sustained load of either 8kPa (maximum sacral pressure recorded when a patient is laid in the supine position in a hospital bed4) or 18 kPa (maximum sacral pressure recorded when a patient is sat in a wheelchair with feet at rest5). Three commercially available dressings were assessed for peak contact pressure redistribution properties.  At 8kPa, Dressing A yielded a reduction in peak contact pressure of 58%, whereas Dressing B and C yielded reductions in peak contact pressure of 52% and 46% respectively.  At 18kPa, Dressing A yielded a reduction in peak contact pressure of 34%, whereas Dressing B and C yielded reductions in peak contact pressure of 20% and 19% respectively.  It is concluded that clinicians should consider the use of foam wound dressings as part of a pressure injury prevention protocol for both supine patients in hospital beds and wheelchair bound patients.

Sponsor

Sponsor name
Medline Industries, Inc.

References

[1] Vander K, Clark M, Dealy C, Gunningberg L, Defloor T. Pressure ulcers prevalence in Europe: A pilot study J Eval Clin Pract, 2007; 13 (2): 227 – 232 [2] Padula WV, Pronovost PJ, Makic MBF, Wald HL, Moran D, Mishra MK, Meltzer DO.  Value of hospital resources for effective  pressure injury prevention: a cost-effectiveness analysis.  BMJ Qual SF 2019 Feb; 28(2) [3] Walsh NS, Blanck AW, Smith L, Cross M, Anderson L, Polito C. Use of sacral silicone border dressings as one component of a pressure ulcer prevention program in an intensive care unit setting. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nur 2012: 39, 146 – 149 [4]Goossens RH, Snijders CJ, Holscher TG, Heerens WC, Holman AE.  Shear stress measured on bed and wheelchairs. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1997 Sep;29(3):131-6. [5]  Lindan O, Greenway RM. Piazza JM. Pressure distribution on the surface of the human body. I. Evaluation in lying and sitting positions using a “bed of springs and nails.” Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1965;46:378.)

Product Information

Optifoam Gentle SA

Trademark

Dressing A = Optifoam Gentle SA Sacral (Medline Industries); Dressing B = Mepilex Border Sacrum (Mölnlycke); Dressing C = Allevyn Life Sacrum (Smith & Nephew)