A PHP Error was encountered

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

Closed Incision Negative Pressure Wound Therapy vs Conventional Dry Dressings After Primary Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Study. | LitMetric

Closed Incision Negative Pressure Wound Therapy vs Conventional Dry Dressings After Primary Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Controlled Study.

J Arthroplasty

The Orthopaedic Research Institute of Queensland (ORIQL), Pimlico, Queensland, Australia; Mater Health Services North Queensland Ltd, Pimlico, Queensland, Australia; The Orthopaedic Department, The Townsville Hospital, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.

Published: November 2016

Background: The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) on quality of life (QoL), wound complications, and cost after primary knee arthroplasty.

Methods: A prospective analysis of 33 patients undergoing primary knee arthroplasty performed by 3 surgeons in one institution. The first 12 patients (3 bilateral and 9 unilateral) had conventional dry dressings (CDD) applied and cost of dressings was assessed. The other 21 patients all underwent bilateral knee arthroplasty and had either side randomized to receiving NPWT or CDD. Cost of dressings, wound complications, and QoL were compared.

Results: One patient had a reaction to the NPWT requiring readmission. Another had persistent wound drainage that required NPWT application. There were no wound issues in the remaining 31 patients. The average cost in the first 12 patients was Australian dollar $48.70 with an average of 1.5 changes on ward. In the 21 patients receiving both dressings, the average cost for CDD was less (Australian dollar $43.51 vs $396.02, P ≤ .011, effect size [ES] = 1.06). When comparing QoL factors, wound leakage (0.14 vs 0.39 P = .019, ES = 1.02), and wound protection (0.16 vs 0.33, P = .001, ES = 0.021) were better in the NPWT group. There was no other significant difference in QoL factors. The average number of changes on the ward was less for the NPWT group (1.19 vs 1.38, P = .317, ES = 1.02).

Conclusion: We found no benefit in wound healing or cost with NPWT post knee arthroplasty. There was some benefit in NPWT QoL factors less wound leakage and better protection.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2016.04.016DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

knee arthroplasty
16
primary knee
12
qol factors
12
wound
10
negative pressure
8
pressure wound
8
wound therapy
8
conventional dry
8
dry dressings
8
npwt
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!