Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Chronic wounds present a challenge that is costly in terms of quality of life to the patient and in financial terms for the NHS. Several factors contribute to the development of a chronic wound, in particular the influence of bacteria as a biofilm within the wound environment. Irrigating a wound with normal saline has long been advocated as the most appropriate method of wound irrigation but biofilms are now known to be resistant to this method of cleansing. A small (10 patient) evaluation of the use of Prontosan in patients whose duration of chronic wounds exceeded 1 year has demonstrated that Prontosan wound irrigation and Prontosan gel are an appropriate alternative for cleaning, moistening and decontaminating encrusted, contaminated and chronic skin wounds, and can have a dramatic influence of the quality of life for such patients. This article discusses the cause of chronicity within a wound and discusses in depth three of the ten patients in the evaluation.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2006.15.22.22559 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!