The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

The effectiveness of topical negative pressure in the treatment of pressure ulcers: a literature review

The effectiveness of topical negative pressure in the treatment of pressure ulcers: a literature review
The effectiveness of topical negative pressure in the treatment of pressure ulcers: a literature review
The objective of the study was to gain insight into the effectiveness of vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) therapy or, more particularly, topical negative pressure (TNP) in the treatment of pressure ulcers. We carried out a systematic search in Medline, Embase and Cinahl for Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) involving topical negative pressure in pressure ulcers over the period 1992–2007. Five RCTs were included. Two studies dealt exclusively with pressure ulcers. No significant differences in wound healing were found in these studies. Three other studies (mixed etiology of wounds) did show significant differences in wound healing, in the decrease of wound treatment time, and in the decrease in number of bacteria. The quality of these studies, both in terms of methodology and otherwise, did not always match with the scientific standard. Moreover, these studies lacked subgroup analyses. The analyzed studies described positive effects of TNP, although both the control treatment and the end points varied in these studies. On the basis of the systematic assessment of these five RCTs, the conclusion is that TNP has not proven to be more effective than various control interventions. The differences between and within the studies in terms of control interventions, the differences in randomization and a number of weaknesses in the analyses do not allow a good comparison. The main recommendations for follow-up studies include: randomization of patients rather than of wounds, a homogeneous patient population, the use of a single well-defined and procedurally documented control intervention, and prior calculation of the random sample size.
topical negaitve pressure, pressure ulcers, vacuum assisted closure therapy
0930-343X
1-7
van den Boogaard, Mark
4751824c-6a51-4bc8-8854-97f4579e045b
de Laat, Erik
275d51d3-014a-4dfa-8b08-bb025554576c
Spauwen, Paul
0b80a7b9-2e4f-48cc-b4f8-3c9b8df1d995
Schoonhoven, Lisette
46a2705b-c657-409b-b9da-329d5b1b02de
van den Boogaard, Mark
4751824c-6a51-4bc8-8854-97f4579e045b
de Laat, Erik
275d51d3-014a-4dfa-8b08-bb025554576c
Spauwen, Paul
0b80a7b9-2e4f-48cc-b4f8-3c9b8df1d995
Schoonhoven, Lisette
46a2705b-c657-409b-b9da-329d5b1b02de

van den Boogaard, Mark, de Laat, Erik, Spauwen, Paul and Schoonhoven, Lisette (2008) The effectiveness of topical negative pressure in the treatment of pressure ulcers: a literature review. European Journal of Plastic Surgery, 31 (1), 1-7. (doi:10.1007/s00238-008-0216-4).

Record type: Article

Abstract

The objective of the study was to gain insight into the effectiveness of vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) therapy or, more particularly, topical negative pressure (TNP) in the treatment of pressure ulcers. We carried out a systematic search in Medline, Embase and Cinahl for Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) involving topical negative pressure in pressure ulcers over the period 1992–2007. Five RCTs were included. Two studies dealt exclusively with pressure ulcers. No significant differences in wound healing were found in these studies. Three other studies (mixed etiology of wounds) did show significant differences in wound healing, in the decrease of wound treatment time, and in the decrease in number of bacteria. The quality of these studies, both in terms of methodology and otherwise, did not always match with the scientific standard. Moreover, these studies lacked subgroup analyses. The analyzed studies described positive effects of TNP, although both the control treatment and the end points varied in these studies. On the basis of the systematic assessment of these five RCTs, the conclusion is that TNP has not proven to be more effective than various control interventions. The differences between and within the studies in terms of control interventions, the differences in randomization and a number of weaknesses in the analyses do not allow a good comparison. The main recommendations for follow-up studies include: randomization of patients rather than of wounds, a homogeneous patient population, the use of a single well-defined and procedurally documented control intervention, and prior calculation of the random sample size.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 19 December 2007
e-pub ahead of print date: 19 February 2008
Published date: April 2008
Keywords: topical negaitve pressure, pressure ulcers, vacuum assisted closure therapy
Organisations: Faculty of Health Sciences

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 386357
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/386357
ISSN: 0930-343X
PURE UUID: 9ce7f870-f4e8-4ceb-ab95-a07d760c0fe0
ORCID for Lisette Schoonhoven: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-7129-3766

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 01 Feb 2016 10:06
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 03:41

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Mark van den Boogaard
Author: Erik de Laat
Author: Paul Spauwen

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×