Wound irrigation versus swabbing technique for cleansing noninfected chronic wounds : a systematic review of differences in bleeding, pain, infection, exudate, and necrotic tissue
- Author
- Erin M. Rajhathy, Juliann Vander Meer, Teresa Valenzano, Leanna E. Laing, Kevin Y. Woo, Dimitri Beeckman (UGent) and Karin Falk-Brynhildsen
- Organization
- Abstract
- Purpose: To systematically summarize and review the existing literature to determine the difference between wound cleansing techniques, irrigation and swabbing, in relation to bleeding, pain, infection, necrotic tissue and exudate in non-infected chronic wounds including pressure injuries, venous and arterial leg ulcers and diabetic foot ulcers.Methods: A systematic search of the electronic databases Ovid Medline, Cochrane Database of Systematic Re-views, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and EMBASE was performed to identify all relevant literature in English. The search also included systematic reviews as a method to obtain additional potential citations by manually searching the reference lists. Included studies were assessed for methodological quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.Results: One study met eligibility criteria. Two hundred fifty six patients with wounds healing via secondary intention (n symbolscript 256) were included. Wound cleansing via swabbing technique was associated with increased perception of pain and increased rates of infection when compared to the irrigation group (93.4% versus 84.2% p symbolscript 0.02 and 5.2% versus 3.3% p symbolscript 0.44, respectively). Only a small proportion of this sample met the inclusion criteria, so the results are not considered externally valid.Conclusion: Wound cleansing remains a controversial topic. Despite calls for further research, there continues to remain a large gap in evidence to guide practice. Irrigation continues to replace swabbing in the management of chronic wounds, although evidence of improved outcomes is virtually nonexistent. Although the one study identified was of sound methodological quality, chronic wounds accounted for only a small percentage of the sample. Therefore, results are not generalizable to those with chronic wounds. Further research is needed to determine the effectiveness of basic wound cleansing techniques before considering more costly products.
- Keywords
- Dermatology, Pathology and Forensic Medicine, Pain, Necrotic tissue, Infection, Exudate, Cleansing, Chronic wound, Bleeding
Downloads
-
1-s2.0-S0965206X22001255-main.pdf
- full text (Accepted manuscript)
- |
- open access
- |
- |
- 732.33 KB
Citation
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication: http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-01GJCSTW415BKS2RAF9ZGZG65G
- MLA
- Rajhathy, Erin M., et al. “Wound Irrigation versus Swabbing Technique for Cleansing Noninfected Chronic Wounds : A Systematic Review of Differences in Bleeding, Pain, Infection, Exudate, and Necrotic Tissue.” JOURNAL OF TISSUE VIABILITY, vol. 32, no. 1, Elsevier BV, 2023, pp. 136–43, doi:10.1016/j.jtv.2022.11.002.
- APA
- Rajhathy, E. M., Meer, J. V., Valenzano, T., Laing, L. E., Woo, K. Y., Beeckman, D., & Falk-Brynhildsen, K. (2023). Wound irrigation versus swabbing technique for cleansing noninfected chronic wounds : a systematic review of differences in bleeding, pain, infection, exudate, and necrotic tissue. JOURNAL OF TISSUE VIABILITY, 32(1), 136–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtv.2022.11.002
- Chicago author-date
- Rajhathy, Erin M., Juliann Vander Meer, Teresa Valenzano, Leanna E. Laing, Kevin Y. Woo, Dimitri Beeckman, and Karin Falk-Brynhildsen. 2023. “Wound Irrigation versus Swabbing Technique for Cleansing Noninfected Chronic Wounds : A Systematic Review of Differences in Bleeding, Pain, Infection, Exudate, and Necrotic Tissue.” JOURNAL OF TISSUE VIABILITY 32 (1): 136–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtv.2022.11.002.
- Chicago author-date (all authors)
- Rajhathy, Erin M., Juliann Vander Meer, Teresa Valenzano, Leanna E. Laing, Kevin Y. Woo, Dimitri Beeckman, and Karin Falk-Brynhildsen. 2023. “Wound Irrigation versus Swabbing Technique for Cleansing Noninfected Chronic Wounds : A Systematic Review of Differences in Bleeding, Pain, Infection, Exudate, and Necrotic Tissue.” JOURNAL OF TISSUE VIABILITY 32 (1): 136–143. doi:10.1016/j.jtv.2022.11.002.
- Vancouver
- 1.Rajhathy EM, Meer JV, Valenzano T, Laing LE, Woo KY, Beeckman D, et al. Wound irrigation versus swabbing technique for cleansing noninfected chronic wounds : a systematic review of differences in bleeding, pain, infection, exudate, and necrotic tissue. JOURNAL OF TISSUE VIABILITY. 2023;32(1):136–43.
- IEEE
- [1]E. M. Rajhathy et al., “Wound irrigation versus swabbing technique for cleansing noninfected chronic wounds : a systematic review of differences in bleeding, pain, infection, exudate, and necrotic tissue,” JOURNAL OF TISSUE VIABILITY, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 136–143, 2023.
@article{01GJCSTW415BKS2RAF9ZGZG65G, abstract = {{Purpose: To systematically summarize and review the existing literature to determine the difference between wound cleansing techniques, irrigation and swabbing, in relation to bleeding, pain, infection, necrotic tissue and exudate in non-infected chronic wounds including pressure injuries, venous and arterial leg ulcers and diabetic foot ulcers.Methods: A systematic search of the electronic databases Ovid Medline, Cochrane Database of Systematic Re-views, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and EMBASE was performed to identify all relevant literature in English. The search also included systematic reviews as a method to obtain additional potential citations by manually searching the reference lists. Included studies were assessed for methodological quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.Results: One study met eligibility criteria. Two hundred fifty six patients with wounds healing via secondary intention (n symbolscript 256) were included. Wound cleansing via swabbing technique was associated with increased perception of pain and increased rates of infection when compared to the irrigation group (93.4% versus 84.2% p symbolscript 0.02 and 5.2% versus 3.3% p symbolscript 0.44, respectively). Only a small proportion of this sample met the inclusion criteria, so the results are not considered externally valid.Conclusion: Wound cleansing remains a controversial topic. Despite calls for further research, there continues to remain a large gap in evidence to guide practice. Irrigation continues to replace swabbing in the management of chronic wounds, although evidence of improved outcomes is virtually nonexistent. Although the one study identified was of sound methodological quality, chronic wounds accounted for only a small percentage of the sample. Therefore, results are not generalizable to those with chronic wounds. Further research is needed to determine the effectiveness of basic wound cleansing techniques before considering more costly products.}}, author = {{Rajhathy, Erin M. and Meer, Juliann Vander and Valenzano, Teresa and Laing, Leanna E. and Woo, Kevin Y. and Beeckman, Dimitri and Falk-Brynhildsen, Karin}}, issn = {{0965-206X}}, journal = {{JOURNAL OF TISSUE VIABILITY}}, keywords = {{Dermatology,Pathology and Forensic Medicine,Pain,Necrotic tissue,Infection,Exudate,Cleansing,Chronic wound,Bleeding}}, language = {{eng}}, number = {{1}}, pages = {{136--143}}, publisher = {{Elsevier BV}}, title = {{Wound irrigation versus swabbing technique for cleansing noninfected chronic wounds : a systematic review of differences in bleeding, pain, infection, exudate, and necrotic tissue}}, url = {{http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtv.2022.11.002}}, volume = {{32}}, year = {{2023}}, }
- Altmetric
- View in Altmetric
- Web of Science
- Times cited: