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: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

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

Negative pressure wound therapy versus microcurrent electrical stimulation in wound healing in burns. | LitMetric

Negative pressure wound therapy versus microcurrent electrical stimulation in wound healing in burns.

J Wound Care

Assistant Professor, Department of Basic Science for Physical Therapy, Faculty of Physical Therapy, Cairo University, Egypt.

Published: April 2019

Objective: To compare the efficacy of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) with that of microcurrent electrical stimulation (MES) on wound surface area, length of stay (LoS) and colony count of wounds in patients with burns.

Method: Patients with thermal dermal burn injuries covering 25-40% of total body surface area were enrolled in this clinical trial. Participants were randomly allocated into three, equal-sized groups: patients receiving NPWT, patients receiving MES and a control group which received standard wound care. All groups received the same traditional physical therapy programme in addition to the same nursing and medical care. In all groups, wound surface area, colony count and LoS were measured 72 hours after thermal burn injury (pre), after 10 days and again at 21 days from the beginning of the study.

Results: A total of 45 patients took part in the study. There were statistically significant decreases in wound surface area observed in all groups (p<0.05) while MES showed the highest mean percentage of reduction in wound surface. MES and NPWT both showed the lowest values for bacterial growth but NPWT was superior in colony count reduction. For LoS, both MES and NPWT showed the lowest mean value.

Conclusion: From the findings of this study, MES was more effective in decreasing wound surface area in burn wounds while NPWT was more effective in reducing bacterial growth.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2019.28.4.214DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

surface area
16
wound surface
12
negative pressure
8
pressure wound
8
wound therapy
8
microcurrent electrical
8
electrical stimulation
8
colony count
8
patients receiving
8
care groups
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!