Please note that the copy function is not enabled for this field.
If you wish to
modify
existing outcomes, please copy and paste the current outcome text into the Update field.
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
LOGIN
CREATE ACCOUNT
MY TRIALS
REGISTER TRIAL
FAQs
HINTS AND TIPS
DEFINITIONS
Trial Review
The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been endorsed by the ANZCTR. Before participating in a study, talk to your health care provider and refer to this
information for consumers
Download to PDF
Trial registered on ANZCTR
Registration number
ACTRN12623000294651
Ethics application status
Approved
Date submitted
24/01/2023
Date registered
17/03/2023
Date last updated
17/03/2023
Date data sharing statement initially provided
17/03/2023
Date results information initially provided
17/03/2023
Type of registration
Retrospectively registered
Titles & IDs
Public title
Evaluation of Skin Tear healing outcomes utilising two differing wound dressing types.
Query!
Scientific title
Pilot Study: Adhesive silicone foam dressing versus meshed silicone interface dressing for the management of skin tears: a comparison of healing rates, patients’ and nurses’ satisfaction.
Query!
Secondary ID [1]
308538
0
None
Query!
Universal Trial Number (UTN)
Query!
Trial acronym
Query!
Linked study record
Query!
Health condition
Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied:
Skin Tears
328461
0
Query!
Wound healing
328913
0
Query!
Condition category
Condition code
Skin
325493
325493
0
0
Query!
Other skin conditions
Query!
Injuries and Accidents
325905
325905
0
0
Query!
Other injuries and accidents
Query!
Intervention/exposure
Study type
Interventional
Query!
Description of intervention(s) / exposure
This study assessed Skin Tear healing trends with the use of two differing wound dressing products which were used as part of standard practice to ascertain which product provided the best outcomes. These two dressings were Mepilex Border (adhesive silicone foam dressing) and Mepitel (meshed silicone interface dressing).
Both products are manufactured by the same company and fall into the generic category of soft silicone dressings and utilise what is called ‘Safetac Soft Silicone Technology’ (SSST). While they share the same SSST, they are completely different in terms of appearance, application, and usage.
Mepilex Border is a self-adhesive waterproof dressing with foamlike like properties that absorb exudate and evaporate excess exudate (wound ooze) through the top of the dressing via moisture vapour permeability. The dressing contact layer (which sits on the skin) contains the SSST. When placed onto a skin tear this layer anchors the skin flap preventing movement. The absorptive pad absorbs the exudate preventing maceration of the flap and periwound area.
Mepitel is a wound contact layer not unlike traditional tulle gras (paraffin coated open weave gauze) in appearance; however unlike this traditional dressing, Mepitel is wholly constructed with the SSST. This dressing is placed on a skin tear and the surrounding skin, the SSST anchors the skin flap to the surrounding skin and allows exudate to pass through the dressing. This dressing requires a secondary covering to be placed on top to absorb the exudate, for example a combine pad (cotton wool) and then a bandage to hold the dressing in place.
Patients were randomised into two treatment arms with their Skin Tears dressed either with the adhesive silicone foam dressing or the meshed silicone interface dressing. Apart from the two different products used, the total care procedure was the same for both. The Research Nurse/Assistant (RA) collected baseline data when the skin tear was first assessed, with follow-up data collected at 7 days, 14 days, and 21 days.
The RA was responsible for undertaking the dressing (which includes removal of the old dressing, wound cleansing and dressing reapplication - in accordance with the Hospital Wound Management Procedure) as per the random allocation at each data collection time. As per the manufactures guidelines and the protocol, both these dressings were to remain in place for the 7 days between the RA visits.
A wound management/treatment form with the dressing plan (as per the random allocation) was included within the patient’s ward clinical documents. If the dressing required changing before the RA visit, the ward nursing staff would change the dressing as per the plan and document this on the wound management/treatment form (in accordance with the Hospital Wound Management Procedure). They had an additional step to call and advice the Research Team of this dressing change. Both the recording on the wound management/treatment form and call to the Research Team were used as strategies to assess adherence to the dressing plan.
Query!
Intervention code [1]
325038
0
Treatment: Devices
Query!
Comparator / control treatment
This study compared patients skin tear healing outcomes in the use of two differing wound dressing products using an Adhesive silicone foam dressing (Mepilex Border) as the comparator dressing.
Query!
Control group
Active
Query!
Outcomes
Primary outcome [1]
333341
0
The primary outcome is the is Skin Tear Healing, this is a clinical determination based on a composite assessment of skin flap quality, epithelial and granulation tissue regeneration.
Query!
Assessment method [1]
333341
0
Query!
Timepoint [1]
333341
0
Assessments will be undertaken after wound cleansing and prior to dressing application on day of recruitment, then at day 7, day 14 and finally day 21.
Query!
Secondary outcome [1]
416678
0
Dressing product ‘fit for purpose’: ease of application. Assessed using likert scale.
Query!
Assessment method [1]
416678
0
Query!
Timepoint [1]
416678
0
Assessments will be undertaken on day of recruitment, then at day 7, day 14 and finally day 21, post-dressing application.
Query!
Secondary outcome [2]
418673
0
Dressing product ‘fit for purpose’: maintains its integrity Assessed was dressing intact at review.
Query!
Assessment method [2]
418673
0
Query!
Timepoint [2]
418673
0
Assessments will be undertaken post recruitment at day 7, then at day 14 and finally day 21, prior to old dressing removal and wound cleansing.
Query!
Secondary outcome [3]
418675
0
Dressing product ‘fit for purpose’: manages exudate. Assessed using likert scale
Query!
Assessment method [3]
418675
0
Query!
Timepoint [3]
418675
0
Assessments will be undertaken post recruitment at day 7, then at day 14 and finally day 21, prior to old dressing removal and wound cleansing.
Query!
Secondary outcome [4]
418679
0
Patient experience: wound pain. Assessed using verbal response on pain scale 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst) pain can imagine.
Query!
Assessment method [4]
418679
0
Query!
Timepoint [4]
418679
0
Assessments will be undertaken on day of recruitment, then at day 7, day 14 and finally day 21, post-dressing application.
Query!
Secondary outcome [5]
418680
0
Patient experience: comfort of dressing. Assessed using likert scale.
Query!
Assessment method [5]
418680
0
Query!
Timepoint [5]
418680
0
Assessments will be undertaken on day of recruitment, then at day 7, day 14 and finally day 21, post-dressing application.
Query!
Secondary outcome [6]
418681
0
Patient experience: effects on activities of daily activities. Assessed using likert scale.
Query!
Assessment method [6]
418681
0
Query!
Timepoint [6]
418681
0
Assessments will be undertaken on day of recruitment, then at day 7, day 14 and finally day 21, post-dressing application.
Query!
Secondary outcome [7]
418682
0
Patient experience: overall satisfaction of the product
Query!
Assessment method [7]
418682
0
Query!
Timepoint [7]
418682
0
Assessments will be undertaken on day of recruitment, then at day 7, day 14 and finally day 21, post-dressing application.
Query!
Eligibility
Key inclusion criteria
Skin tears occurring on the arms
Skin Tear STAR category 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 3
Skin tears equal to or less than 100 cm2 area
Query!
Minimum age
18
Years
Query!
Query!
Maximum age
No limit
Query!
Query!
Sex
Both males and females
Query!
Can healthy volunteers participate?
No
Query!
Key exclusion criteria
Skin Tear that are older than 72 hours
Skin tears occurring on other parts of the body
Patients unable attend follow-up
Patients with uncontrolled bleeding
Patients with a clot beneath the skin flap which is unable to be evacuated
Query!
Study design
Purpose of the study
Treatment
Query!
Allocation to intervention
Randomised controlled trial
Query!
Procedure for enrolling a subject and allocating the treatment (allocation concealment procedures)
Allocation was concealed if it was done by sealed opaque envelopes
Query!
Methods used to generate the sequence in which subjects will be randomised (sequence generation)
A random number generator was used to allocate participants to the 2 treatment arms.
Query!
Masking / blinding
Open (masking not used)
Query!
Who is / are masked / blinded?
Query!
Query!
Query!
Query!
Intervention assignment
Parallel
Query!
Other design features
Query!
Phase
Not Applicable
Query!
Type of endpoint/s
Efficacy
Query!
Statistical methods / analysis
All data will be entered into SPSS Version 19 for analysis. Descriptive statistics will be used to describe the sample and inferential statistics will be used to analyse differences and relationships in the data. Significance is set at p<0.05
Query!
Recruitment
Recruitment status
Stopped early
Query!
Data analysis
Data analysis is complete
Query!
Reason for early stopping/withdrawal
Lack of funding/staff/facilities
Participant recruitment difficulties
Query!
Date of first participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
12/11/2013
Query!
Date of last participant enrolment
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
13/02/2020
Query!
Date of last data collection
Anticipated
Query!
Actual
19/02/2020
Query!
Sample size
Target
126
Query!
Accrual to date
Query!
Final
52
Query!
Recruitment in Australia
Recruitment state(s)
QLD
Query!
Recruitment hospital [1]
23701
0
The Prince Charles Hospital - Chermside
Query!
Recruitment postcode(s) [1]
39136
0
4032 - Chermside
Query!
Funding & Sponsors
Funding source category [1]
312786
0
Charities/Societies/Foundations
Query!
Name [1]
312786
0
The Prince Charles Hospital Foundation
Query!
Address [1]
312786
0
627 Rode Road, Chermside, Qld 4032
Query!
Country [1]
312786
0
Australia
Query!
Primary sponsor type
Hospital
Query!
Name
The Prince Charles Hospital
Query!
Address
627 Rode Road, Chermside, Qld 4032
Query!
Country
Australia
Query!
Secondary sponsor category [1]
314483
0
University
Query!
Name [1]
314483
0
Australian Catholic University
Query!
Address [1]
314483
0
1100 Nudgee Rd, Banyo QLD 4014
Query!
Country [1]
314483
0
Australia
Query!
Ethics approval
Ethics application status
Approved
Query!
Ethics committee name [1]
312076
0
The Prince Charles Hospital, Metro North Hospital and Health Service, Human Research Ethics Committee
Query!
Ethics committee address [1]
312076
0
627 Rode Road, Chermside, Qld 4032
Query!
Ethics committee country [1]
312076
0
Australia
Query!
Date submitted for ethics approval [1]
312076
0
27/02/2013
Query!
Approval date [1]
312076
0
26/04/2013
Query!
Ethics approval number [1]
312076
0
HREC-13QPCH-69
Query!
Summary
Brief summary
Brief summary: The purpose of this pilot study is to assess Skin Tear healing trends with the use of two differing wound dressing types (adhesive silicone foam dressing versus meshed silicone interface dressing), the dressing performance outcomes and the patient and staff satisfaction with the use of these two products. These two products are currently in use for the treatment of Skin Tears within the TPCH based on a standardised treatment regime. This regime is based on best available evidence, which included expert opinion and a regime generated by a dressing product manufacturer. Although the two options are based on a review of the evidence, there is minimal evidence in regards to their skin tear treatment efficacy. In practice, the decision to use one or the other is based on individual staff preference. The hypothesis is that one of the dressings advantages versus disadvantages, in comparison to the alternative will result in improved healing outcomes, patient and staff satisfaction. The design of the study is a randomised study of TPCH patients sustaining upper limb skin tears. A consecutive, convenience sample of 126 adults (aged 18 or over) will be recruited. Following consent patients will be randomised into two treatment arms with their Skin Tears dressed either with the adhesive silicone foam dressing or the meshed silicone interface dressing. Baseline data will be collected when the skin tear is first assessed and dressed, with follow up data will be collected at 7 days, 14 days, and 21 days.
Query!
Trial website
Query!
Trial related presentations / publications
Query!
Public notes
Query!
Contacts
Principal investigator
Name
123382
0
Mr Damian Williams
Query!
Address
123382
0
The Prince Charles Hospital
Wound/Stoma Service
627 Rode Road
Chermside, Qld 4032
Query!
Country
123382
0
Australia
Query!
Phone
123382
0
+61 7 31395646
Query!
Fax
123382
0
Query!
Email
123382
0
[email protected]
Query!
Contact person for public queries
Name
123383
0
Mr Damian Williams
Query!
Address
123383
0
The Prince Charles Hospital
Wound/Stoma Service
627 Rode Road
Chermside, Qld 4032
Query!
Country
123383
0
Australia
Query!
Phone
123383
0
+61 7 31395646
Query!
Fax
123383
0
Query!
Email
123383
0
[email protected]
Query!
Contact person for scientific queries
Name
123384
0
Prof Paul Fulbrook
Query!
Address
123384
0
The Prince Charles Hospital
Nursing Research & Practice Development Centre
627 Rode Road
Chermside, Qld 4032
Query!
Country
123384
0
Australia
Query!
Phone
123384
0
+61 731394087
Query!
Fax
123384
0
Query!
Email
123384
0
[email protected]
Query!
Data sharing statement
Will individual participant data (IPD) for this trial be available (including data dictionaries)?
No
Query!
No/undecided IPD sharing reason/comment
The data that support the findings of this study are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.
Query!
What supporting documents are/will be available?
No Supporting Document Provided
Doc. No.
Type
Citation
Link
Email
Other Details
Attachment
17856
Ethical approval
385081-(Uploaded-17-02-2023-16-08-20)-Study-related document.pdf
18103
Study protocol
385081-(Uploaded-24-01-2023-12-06-27)-Study-related document.pdf
Results publications and other study-related documents
Documents added manually
No documents have been uploaded by study researchers.
Documents added automatically
No additional documents have been identified.
Download to PDF