Evaluation of two calcium alginate dressings in the management of venous ulcers. Use of a fibrous dressing in exuding leg ulcers.
Calcium alginate dressings facilitate the management of highly exudating wounds such as venous ulcers. To evaluate and compare the performance of two calcium alginate dressings in the management of venous ulcers, a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study was conducted among 19 outpatients at two wound clinics in California. Ten patients (53%) were treated with Alginate A and nine patients (47%) with Alginate B. Dressings were changed weekly and patients were followed for a maximum of 6 weeks or until the venous ulcer no longer required the use of an alginate dressing. At each dressing change, the wound was assessed and dressing performance evaluated. Absorbency of exudate, patient comfort during wear, ease of removal, adherence to wound bed, dressing residue following initial irrigation, patient comfort during removal, ease of application, and conformability were assessed. Patients using Alginate A experienced significantly less foul odor (P = 0.02) and less denuded skin (P = 0.04) than Alginate B at follow-up wound assessments. With the exception of conformability, Alginate A was rated significantly better than Alginate B (P less than or equal to 0.05) in all dressing performance assessments. No significant healing differences were observed. As the different performance characteristics of various calcium alginate dressings become more obvious in clinical practice, further study is warranted to determine their optimal effectiveness. In a multicentre, prospective, randomised trial of 44 patients with exuding leg ulcers, a new hydrofibre dressing was compared with an alginate dressing in terms of dressing performance, patient comfort, safety and cost-effectiveness. The groups were well matched with regard to sex and age. A statistically significant difference between treatment groups was observed in mean wear time, with a longer wear time of four days observed in the hydrofibre dressing group compared to three days in the alginate group. The hydrofibre dressing group therefore demonstrated a significantly lower frequency of dressing changes required per week. Significantly more patients achieved a seven-day wear time with the hydrofibre dressing than with the alginate dressing. There was no difference with regard to percentage change in ulcer area. Cost-effectiveness was based on the cost of dressings, compression therapy and nursing time to achieve a healed wound. However, because of small patient numbers, it was difficult to make an accurate comparison. This study suggests that the hydrofibre dressing may have clinical benefits that merit further investigation with larger patient numbers.
The current evidence base does not suggest that alginate dressings are more or less effective in the healing of venous leg ulcers than hydrocolloid or plain non-adherent dressings, and there is no evidence to indicate a difference between different proprietary alginate dressings. However, the RCTs in this area are considered to be of low or unclear methodological quality. Further, good quality evidence is required from well designed and rigorously conducted RCTs that employ - and clearly report on - methods to minimise bias, prior to any definitive conclusions being made regarding the efficacy of alginate dressings in the management of venous leg ulcers.