In this study ten commercial smart wound dressings - CombiDerm®, Versiva® XC®, Sorbsan Plus SA, Opsite* Post-Op, Aquacel™ Surgical, DuoDerm®, Granuflex®, Mepilex® Border, Allevyn Gentle Border and Biatain® - were tested and evaluated. The following experimental tests were performed on the dressing specimens; area density, thickness, fluid uptake and handling, conformability, absorption rate, waterproofness, stainless steel (SS) peel test and vertical wicking. It was found that Biatain® had the highest absorbency and fluid handling capacity and also had lower moisture vapour permeability value compared to the other dressings. Versiva® XC® and DuoDerm® had higher extensibility values than other dressings, which are 3.56 machine direction (MD) and 3.99 (CD) cross direction Ncm-1 for Versiva® XC® and 3.67 (MD) - 3.12 (CD) Ncm-1 for DuoDerm®. The pattern of results for permanent set was found to be similar to the extensibility results. All tested dressings passed the waterproofness threshold. DuoDerm® and Granuflex® showed more than 20 minutes rate of absorption and also their SS Peel values were found to be considerably higher than the other dressings investigated.
[1]
Seyed Hassan Jafari,et al.
A review on wound dressings with an emphasis on electrospun nanofibrous polymeric bandages
,
2010
.
[2]
George Broughton,et al.
The Basic Science of Wound Healing
,
2006,
Plastic and reconstructive surgery.
[3]
David A. Puleo,et al.
An Introduction To Tissue-Biomaterial Interactions: Tissue-Biomaterial
,
2003
.
[4]
S. S. Davis,et al.
An introduction to tissue-biomaterial interactions
,
2002
.
[5]
J. Rainey.
Wound Care: A Handbook for Community Nurses
,
2001
.
[6]
G. Menaker.
Wound dressings at the turn of the millennium
,
2001
.
[7]
Yimin Qin.
Advanced Wound Dressings
,
2001
.
[8]
L. Bolton,et al.
Moisture and healing: beyond the jargon.
,
2000,
Ostomy/wound management.
[9]
S. Thomas.
A guide to dressing selection.
,
1997,
Journal of Wound Care.