Early versus delayed dressing removal after primary closure of clean and clean contaminated wounds: an observational study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20242120Keywords:
Early dressing removal, Operative dressing removal, Post operative wound care, Wound dressing, Surgical site infectionAbstract
Background: Traditionally, surgical dressings have remained untouched for several days after surgery. However, recent research is exploring the potential benefits of removing dressings sooner. Early removal may offer advantages like quicker detection of infection and improved patient comfort, but it's crucial to determine if it affects healing rates or patient satisfaction compared to the traditional delayed approach.
Methods: A year-long cohort study investigated the efficacy of early (within 48 hours) versus delayed dressing removal 150 post-surgical patients who were divided into two respective groups. Data analysis was performed using statistical software.
Results: Early and delayed dressing removal showed no significant difference in wound complications (p-values > 0.05 for both Chi-square and t-tests). However, patient satisfaction was lower in the early removal group (97 dissatisfied vs 143 satisfied in delayed removal). While the study found no objective benefit to delayed removal, it suggests patients were less satisfied with early removal.
Conclusions: Although there were no statistically significant results between the early and delayed removal of dressing, early removal of dressing had the advantage of cost effectiveness, early detection of wound infection and decreased duration of hospital stay in patients.
Metrics
References
Garcia CF, Colon RL, Bond MC. Essential concepts of wound management. Emerg Med Clin of North America. 2010;28(4):951-67.
Toon CD, Lusuku C, Ramamurthy R, Davidson BR, Gurusamy KS. Early versus delayed dressing removal after primary closure of clean and clean-contaminated surgical wounds. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(9):10259.
Zhang T, Zhang F, Chen Z. Removal of dressing following surgical wounds. Exp Ther Med. 2020;19:3219-26.
Lawrence WT. Physiology of the acute wound. Clinics in Plastic Surgery.1998;25(3):321-40.
Bailey and love’s basic principles of surgery 28th edition.
British Medical Association and the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain. Br National Formulary. BMJ. 2011;1.
Hutchinson JJ, Lawrence JC. Wound infection under occlusive dressings. JHI. 1991;17(2):83-94.
Downie F, Egdell S, Bielby A, Searle R. Barrier dressings in surgical site infection prevention strategies. BJN. 2010;19(20):42-6.
Lawrence WT. Physiology of the acute wound. Clin Plastic Surg. 1998;25(3):321-40.
Cutting KF, White RJ. Maceration of the skin and wound bed. 1: Its nature and causes. J Wound Care. 2002;11(7):275-8.
Dyson M, Young S, Pendle CL, Webster DF, Lang SM. Comparison of the effects of moist and dry conditions on dermal repair. JID. 1988;91(5):434-9.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
