Bienvenidos al XII Congreso SEHER

Cuidar las heridas con excelencia... es posible

Gracias a todos los asistentes de la SEHER 2024. 

Nos vemos el año que viene. 

No dudes en contactar con nosotros si necesitás más información de nuestros productos. 


Contacta con nosotros

Header GNEAUPP -500x500 only nurse.png

Contacta con nosotros

Algoritmos y herramientas de decisión clínica

ALLEVYN Apósitos de espuma

Liberar tiempo, ahorrar costes y mejorar la calidad de vida de las personas...es posible2,3,5-10

PICO Terapia de presión negativa

Activar la curación de heridas que no cicatrizan... es posible con PICO◊13

Cambia la trayectoria de las heridas de difícil cicatrización con PICO consiguiendo una cicatrización más eficaz.

El sistema de Terapia de Presión Negativa (TPN) de un solo uso PICO cuenta con una sólida base de evidencias. Hasta la fecha, se han identificado 316* publicaciones del sistema de TPN de un solo uso PICO.

Le animamos a que conozca las evidencias, desde los resultados clínicos hasta la satisfacción del paciente y el ahorro de recursos. 

Referencias
  1. Moore Z, Coggins T. Clinician attitudes to shared-care and perceptions on the current extent of patient engagement in wound care: Results of a clinician survey. Wounds International. 2021;12(1):48-53.
  2. Joy H, Bielby A, Searle R. A collaborative project to enhance efficiency through dressing change practice. J Wound Care. 2015;24(7):312-317. doi:10.12968/jowc.2015.24.7.312
  3. Tiscar-González V, Menor-Rodríguez M, Rabadán-Sainz C, et al. Clinical and Economic Impact of Wound Care Using a Polyurethane Foam Multilayer Dressing. Advances in Skin & Wound Care. 2021;34(1):23-30. doi:10.1097/01.asw.0000722744.20511.71
  4. Moore Z, Kapp S, Loney A, et al. A tool to promote patient and informal carer involvement for shared wound care. Wounds International. 2021;12(3):86-92.
  5. Kirsner R, Dove C, Reyzelman A, Vayser D, Jaimes H. Randomized controlled trial on the efficacy and acceptance of a single-use negative pressure wound therapy system versus traditional negative pressure wound therapy in the treatment of lower limb chronic ulcers (VLU and DFU). In: Poster Presented at the 10th Annual Abu Dhabi Wound Care Conference. 10th Annual Abu Dhabi Wound Care Conference; 2019.
  6. Forni C, D’Alessandro F, Gallerani P, et al. Effectiveness of using a new polyurethane foam multi-layer dressing in the sacral area to prevent the onset of pressure ulcer in the elderly with hip fractures: A pragmatic randomised controlled trial. Int Wound J. 2018;15(3):383-390. doi:10.1111/IWJ.12875
  7. Rossington A, Drysdale K, Winter R. Clinical performance and positive impact on patient wellbeing of ALLEVYN Life. Wounds UK. 2013;9(4):91-95.
  8. Stephen-Haynes J, Bielby A, Searle R. The clinical performance of a silicone foam in an NHS community trust. Journal of Community Nursing. 2013;27(5):50-59.
  9. Simon D, Bielby A. A structured collaborative approach to appraise the clinical performance of a new product. Wounds UK. 2014;10(3`):80-87. https://www.wounds-uk.com/journals/issue/39/article-details/a-structured-collaborative-approach-to-appraise-the-clinical-performance-of-a-new-product
  10. Smith+Nephew. Product Performance of Next Generation ALLEVYN Life Internal Report.; 2016.
  11. Forni C, Searle R. A multilayer polyurethane foam dressing for pressure ulcer prevention in older hip fracture patients: an economic evaluation. J Wound Care. 2020;29(2):120-127. doi:10.12968/JOWC.2020.29.2.120
  12. Smith+Nephew. Internal Report. CSD. AWM.22.045 .; 2022.
  13. Moore Z, Loney A, Probst S, et al. 3.5 billion hours of nurse time released by 2030: Potential efficiency gains from shared care and long-wear advanced foam dressings. Wounds International. 2022;13(2):10-16.
  14. Dowsett C, Hampton J, Myers D, Styche T. Use of PICOTM to improve clinical and economic outcomes in hard-to-heal wounds. Wounds International. 2017;8(2):52-58. www.woundsinternational.com
  15. Kirsner R, Dove C, Reyzelman A, Vayser D, Jaimes H. A prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial on the efficacy of a single-use negative pressure wound therapy system, compared to traditional negative pressure wound therapy in the treatment of chronic ulcers of the lower extremities. Wound Repair Regen. 2019;27(5):519-529. doi:10.1111/WRR.12727
  16. Hurd T. Evaluating the Costs and Benefits of Innovations in Chronic Wound Care Products and Practices. Published online 2013.
  17. Hudson DA, Adams KG, Van Huyssteen A, et al. Simplified negative pressure wound therapy: clinical evaluation of an ultraportable, no-canister system. Int Wound J. 2015;12(2):195-201. doi:10.1111/IWJ.12080
  18. Hurd T, Trueman P, Rossington A. Use of a portable, single-use negative pressure wound therapy device in home care patients with low to moderately exuding wounds: a case series. Ostomy Wound Management. 2014;60(3):30-36.
  19. Gilchrist B, Robinson M, Jaimes H. Performance, safety, and efficacy of a single use negative pressure wound therapy system for surgically closed incision sites and skin grafts: A prospective multi-centre follow-up study. Published online 2020.
  20. Smith & Nephew March 2018.Kendal PICO 7Y - pump weight and dimensions. Internal Report. DS.18.066.R.
  21. Smith & Nephew 2018.PICO 14 Pump weight and dimensions. Internal Report. RD/18/137.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

i Manufacturer's IFU should always be consulted.
ii “Bigger smiles” refers to patient “overall satisfaction” score, where 87.6% of PICO sNPWT patients agreed or strongly agreed they were satisfied vs. 68.9% of tNPWT patients
iii With a training regime
iv Compared to baseline with standard dressings14 and vs tNPWT15
v n=17 This is for wounds less than three months in duration. This is wounds classified as on a healing trajectory, not necessarily 'success'

Title

Text

Explore