Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Removable rigid dressings versus soft dressings: a randomized, controlled study with dysvascular, trans-tibial amputees
Deutsch A, English RD, Vermeer TC, Murray PS, Condous M
Prosthetics and Orthotics International 2005 Aug;29(2):193-200
clinical trial
3/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: No; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: No; Adequate follow-up: No; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

This study compares a standard soft dressing (SSD) with a removable rigid dressing (RRD) in a randomized, controlled trial using 50 dysvascular trans-tibial amputees. Both dressing types were applied immediately post-operatively and were only removed for wound dressing changes. Half the subjects were allocated prospectively by ballot to either the RRD group or the SSD group. There was a strong trend indicating that primary wound healing of the stump occurred almost 2 weeks earlier in subjects using the RRD (RRD 51.2 days +/- 19.4; SSD 64.7 days +/- 29.5; p = 0.07; RRD n = 17; SSD n = 14.) There were no significant differences between the other parameters measured which included time to prosthetic fitting, length of hospital stay, incidence of stump breakdown, and time taken for stump volume to stabilize. The incidence of stump damage due to falls was also recorded, the results indicating that RRDs may protect the new stump from trauma.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help