OneNPWT

Negative pressure wound therapy can be complicated to manage, adding to costs and workloads; potentially resulting in delayed discharge and pressure on resources. International expert guidelines recommend a simplified decision-making framework to help inform the appropriate use of NPWT1,2

Un consensus d’experts internationaux

Les experts recommandent la mise en œuvre d’un cadre basé sur les preuves pour simplifier et optimiser l’application du TPN, et pour accompagner la sélection des systèmes de TPN appropriés.

La sélection rapide d’un système de TPN à usage unique, comme le TPN à usage unique PICO◊, pour les plaies cliniquement éligibles peut :

Preuves et études de cas



Disclaimer

*n=96; compared to alternative ports.

**For healing progression compared to baseline trajectory and for healing compared with predictions for standard care; n=52 wounds. On responding to stalled chronic wounds of 44 weeks mean duration, the PICO system healed 56% of wounds an average of 10 weeks earlier than predicted with standard wound care dressings; n=9.

***Compared to traditional NPWT over a 12-week treatment period for VLUs and DFUs; n=161; ITT analysis.

****n=326.

Bibliographie
  1. Hurd T. et al. Wounds 2021;33 (suppl 2):S1– S11.
  2. Kirsner R, et al. Wounds 2020;32(12).
  3. Saunders C, et al. BJS Open. 2021;0(0):1 - 8.
  4. Forlee M, et al. Poster presented at: EWMA;9-11 May, 2018; Krakow, Poland.
  5. Dowsett C, et al. Wounds International. 2017;8(2):52-58.
  6. Cray A. . Br J Nurs. 2017 Aug 10;26(15):S6-S18.
  7. Janssen AHJ, et al. J Tissue Viability. 2021 Feb 6.
  8. Kantar Health market research report, November 2018.
  9. Carnali M, et al. Acta Vulnologica. Vol 142016:24-39.
  10. Hampton J. Community Wound Care. 2015:S14-S20.
  11. Kirsner R, et al. Wound Repair Regen. 2019;27(5):519 - 529.
  12. Hurd T, et al. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2014;60(3):30-36.

Title

Text

Explore