• Cindy L Zehrer, David Holm, Staci E Solfest, and Shelley-Ann Walters.
• 3M Health Care, 3M Center, St. Paul, MN, USA.
• Int Wound J. 2014 Dec 1;11(6):681-90.

AbstractThis study compared moisture vapour transmission rate (MVTR) and wear time or fluid-handling capacities of six adhesive foam dressings to a reformulated control dressing. Standardised in vitro MVTR methodology and a previously published in vivo artificial wound model (AWM) were used. Mean inverted MVTR for the reformulated dressing was 12 750 g/m(2) /24 hours and was significantly higher than four of the six comparator dressings (P < 0·0001), which ranged from 830 to 11 360 g/m(2) /24 hours. Mean upright MVTR for the reformulated dressing was 980 g/m(2) /24 hours and was significantly different than all of the comparator dressings (P < 0·0001), which ranged from 80 to 1620 g/m(2) /24 hours (three higher/three lower). The reformulated dressing median wear time ranged from 6·1 to >7·0 days, compared with 1·0 to 3·5 days for the comparator dressings (P = 0·0012 to P < 0·0001). The median fluid volume handled ranged from 78·0 to >87 ml compared with 13·0 to 44·5 ml for the comparator dressings (P = 0·0007 to P < 0·001). Interestingly, inverted MVTR did not correspond well to the AWM. These results suggest that marked differences exist between the dressings in terms of both MVTR and wear time or fluid-handling capacity. Furthermore, high inverted MVTR does not necessarily predict longer wear time or fluid-handling capacities of absorbent dressings.© 2013 The Authors. International Wound Journal © 2013 Medicalhelplines.com Inc and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

13 keywords...

hide…