A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

An Open, Noncomparative, Clinical Follow-up Study to Confirm Performance and Safety of a Gelling Fiber Dressing When Used on Split-thickness Skin Graft Donor Sites. | LitMetric

An Open, Noncomparative, Clinical Follow-up Study to Confirm Performance and Safety of a Gelling Fiber Dressing When Used on Split-thickness Skin Graft Donor Sites.

Adv Skin Wound Care

Sinan Dogan, MD, PhD; Anders Kjölhede, MD, PhD; and Matilda Karlsson, RN, PhD, are from the Department of Hand Surgery, Plastic Surgery and Burns, and Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. The authors give special thanks to the principal investig

Published: September 2025


Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Objective: The performance of a gelling fiber dressing (GFD) was evaluated in adult patients undergoing split-thickness skin graft (STSG) transplantation.

Methods: A gelling fiber dressing was applied directly to the donor sites; a soft-silicone-coated foam was used as the secondary dressing. Follow-ups were scheduled for days 3 and 14, and day 21 for patients with donor sites that had not healed. The primary outcome measure was donor site progression from baseline to last visit when GFD was used. Secondary outcome measures included clinicians' and patients' evaluations of GFD performance, patients' evaluations of pain severity, dressing wear time, and adverse events.

Results: Twenty-nine of 33 participants (87.9%) had donor sites considered as "improved" at the final visit. Twenty (60.6%) donor sites were healed during the period when the GFD was used. High percentages of "good"/"very good" clinicians' ratings for the ability of GFD to absorb/retain exudate (93.3%), absorb/retain blood (96.6%), conform to the wound bed (96.8%), and maintain integrity when wet on removal (100%) were recorded. High percentages of "good"/"very good" patient ratings for comfort during wear (93.9%) and experience during dressing changes (86.6%) were also recorded. Mean pain score at GFD removal was 1.3, on a scale from 0 = no pain to 10 = worst imaginable. Median wear time per individual dressing was 14 days. Four adverse device events were reported.

Conclusions: The findings indicate the suitability of GFD for donor site management. The dressing, rated highly by clinicians and patients, was associated with good healing progression.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12345826PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ASW.0000000000000337DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

donor sites
20
gelling fiber
12
fiber dressing
12
dressing
8
split-thickness skin
8
skin graft
8
sites healed
8
donor site
8
patients' evaluations
8
wear time
8

Similar Publications