Reducing Risk in Emergency Department Wound Management

Pfaff, James A.; Moore, Gregory P.

doi:10.1016/j.emc.2007.01.009

Cited by 21 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Besides, previous studies suggested that wounds on head and neck were less commonly associated with infection development than other locations. In this regard, the incidence of infection estimated 1% to 2% in head and neck, whereas legs and lower extremities were as high is 23% (34)(35)(36)(37). Since these sites are considered to be more infection-prone (20), it is therefore important to consider the site of wounds once deciding to choose cleansing agents with better efficacy and lower adverse effects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Randomized, controlled trial of povidone-iodine to reduce simple traumatic wound infections in the emergency department

Ghafouri

Zare

Bazrafshan

et al. 2016

Injury

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Randomized, controlled trial of povidone-iodine to reduce simple traumatic wound infections in the emergency department

Ghafouri

Zare

Bazrafshan

et al. 2016

Injury

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reported proportion of wound infections in a sutured laceration varies depending on the site of the wound. 5,7 For example, 1% of facial and scalp lacerations become infected, whereas infections in extremity lacerations have been reported to be as high as 7%. 7 Overall, wound infections range anywhere from 1.3 to 17.5%.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…5,7 For example, 1% of facial and scalp lacerations become infected, whereas infections in extremity lacerations have been reported to be as high as 7%. 7 Overall, wound infections range anywhere from 1.3 to 17.5%. 7,14,15 The overall proportion of wound infections in this study was 9 of 160 patients (5.6%), which is in keeping with the published literature.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…7 Overall, wound infections range anywhere from 1.3 to 17.5%. 7,14,15 The overall proportion of wound infections in this study was 9 of 160 patients (5.6%), which is in keeping with the published literature. There was infrequent use of antibiotics in both intervention and control groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…7 These include high-pressure injuries; animal or human bites; crush injuries with significant devitalized tissue; wounds involving exposed tendon, bone, or joints; and grossly contaminated wounds. 7 In the event that these wounds are sutured, we would recommend that they not be considered for suture self-removal.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Are patients willing to remove, and capable of removing, their own nonabsorbable sutures?

Macdonald

Primiani

Lund

2012

CJEM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Providing patients with instructions and equipment regarding self-removal of nonabsorbable sutures could represent a new efficiency in emergency department (ED) practice. The primary outcome was to compare the proportion of patients successfully removing their own sutures when provided with suture removal instructions and equipment versus the standard advice and follow-up care. Secondary outcomes included complication rates, number of physician visits, and patient comfort level. Methods: This prospective, controlled, single-blinded, pseudorandomized trial enrolled consecutive ED patients who met the eligibility criteria (age . 19 years, simple lacerations, nonabsorbable sutures, immunocompetent). The study group was provided with wound care instructions, a suture removal kit, and instructions regarding suture self-removal. The control group received wound care instructions alone. Outcomes were assessed by telephone contact at least 14 days after suturing using a standardized questionnaire. Results: Overall, 183 patients were enrolled (93 in the intervention group; 90 in the control group). Significantly more patients performed suture self-removal in the intervention group (91.5%; 95% CI 85.4-97.5) compared to the control group (62.8%; 95% CI 52.1-73.6) (p , 0.001). Patients visited their physician less often in the intervention group (9.8%; 95% CI 3.3-16.2) compared to the control group (34.6%; 95% CI 24.1-45.2%) (p , 0.001). Complication rates were similar in both groups. Conclusion: Most patients are willing to remove, and capable of removing, their own sutures. Providing appropriate suture removal instructions and equipment to patients with simple lacerations in the ED appears to be both safe and acceptable. RÉ SUMÉObjectifs: Le fait de donner des instructions aux patients sur la faç on d'enlever eux-mê mes les points de suture non ré sorbables et de leur fournir le maté riel né cessaire repré senterait un nouveau moyen d'efficience aux services des urgences. Le principal critè re d'é valuation visait à comparer la proportion de patients ayant ré ussi à bien enlever leurs propres points de suture aprè s avoir reç u des instructions approprié es sur la façon de le faire et le maté riel né cessaire, avec celle ayant reç u les conseils et les soins de suivi habituels. Les critè res d'é valuation secondaires comprenaient le taux de complications, le nombre de consultations mé dicales, et le degré de confort des patients. Mé thodes: Il s'agit d'un essai comparatif, prospectif, mené à simple insu et selon un sché ma pseudoalé atoire chez des patients consé cutifs, traité s à l'urgence, qui ré pondaient aux critè res de sé lection (â ge . 19 ans, lacé rations simples, points de suture non ré sorbables, compé tence immunitaire). Le groupe expé rimental a reç u des instructions sur les soins de la plaie, une trousse pour enlever les points de suture, et des instructions sur la faç on de les enlever eux-mê mes. Le groupe té moin a reç u des instructions sur les soins de la plaie seulement. Les ré su...

show abstract

Evaluation of Soft Tissue Under Ultrasound

Evans

2015

Ultrasonography in the ICU

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reducing Risk in Emergency Department Wound Management

Cited by 21 publications

References 24 publications

Randomized, controlled trial of povidone-iodine to reduce simple traumatic wound infections in the emergency department

Randomized, controlled trial of povidone-iodine to reduce simple traumatic wound infections in the emergency department

Are patients willing to remove, and capable of removing, their own nonabsorbable sutures?

Evaluation of Soft Tissue Under Ultrasound

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About