Picture of boy being examining by doctor at a tuberculosis sanatorium

Understanding our future through Open Access research about our past...

Strathprints makes available scholarly Open Access content by researchers in the Centre for the Social History of Health & Healthcare (CSHHH), based within the School of Humanities, and considered Scotland's leading centre for the history of health and medicine.

Research at CSHHH explores the modern world since 1800 in locations as diverse as the UK, Asia, Africa, North America, and Europe. Areas of specialism include contraception and sexuality; family health and medical services; occupational health and medicine; disability; the history of psychiatry; conflict and warfare; and, drugs, pharmaceuticals and intoxicants.

Explore the Open Access research of the Centre for the Social History of Health and Healthcare. Or explore all of Strathclyde's Open Access research...

Image: Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust. Wellcome Collection - CC-BY.

Enhancing patient recovery following lower limb arthroplasty with a modern wound dressing : a prospective, comparative audit

Hopper, G. P. and Deakin, A. H. and Crane, E. O. and Clarke, J. V. (2012) Enhancing patient recovery following lower limb arthroplasty with a modern wound dressing : a prospective, comparative audit. Journal of Wound Care, 21 (4). pp. 200-203. ISSN 0969-0700

Full text not available in this repository. Request a copy from the Strathclyde author

Abstract

To assess current wound care practice, implement a potentially improved regimen and re-evaluate practice. Two prospective clinical audits were performed over a 6-month period, involving 100 patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty. Fifty consecutive patients with traditional dressings (Mepore; Mölnlycke) were evaluated prior to a change in practice to a modern dressing (Aquacel Surgical; ConvaTec). Fifty consecutive patients were then evaluated with the new dressing to complete the audit cycle. Clinical outcome measures were wear time, number of changes, blister rate and length of hospital stay. Statistical comparisons were performed using Mann Whitney or Fisher's exact test (statistical significance p < 0.05).  Wear time for the traditional dressing (2 days) was significantly shorter than for the modern dressing (7 days; p < 0.001), and required more changes (0 vs 3; p < 0.001). Twenty per cent of patients developed blisters with the traditional dressing compared with 4% with the modern dressing (p=0.028). Median length of stay was the same for the modern dressing (4 days) compared with the traditional dressing (4 days). In the modern dressing group, 75% of patients were discharged by day 4, whereas in the traditional group this took until day 6.  This audit highlights the problems associated with traditional dressings with frequent early dressing changes, blistering and delayed discharge. These adverse outcomes can be minimised with a modern dressing specifically designed for the demands of lower limb arthroplasty. Units planning to implement enhanced recovery regimens should consider adopting this dressing to avoid compromising patient discharge. Declaration of interest: There were no external sources of funding for this audit; however, one author (JC) received reimbursement of expenses to attend and present work at educational conferences from ConvaTec.