Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 27, 2025
Development of a Benchtop Model for Evaluating the Compatibility of Wound Dressing Materials with Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Systems
Published on: May 2, 2025
In Vitro Characterization of Pressure Redistribution Among Commercially Available Wound Dressings
Jeffrey A Niezgoda1, Jonathan A Niezgoda, Sandeep Gopalakrishnan
1At Advancing the Zenith of Healthcare Wound and Vascular Center, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Jeffrey A Niezgoda, MD, FACHM, MAPWCA, CHWS, is President and Chief Executive Officer; and Jonathan A Niezgoda, MA, is Medical Assistant. Sandeep Gopalakrishnan, PhD, MS, DAPWCA, is Assistant Professor, College of Nursing, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee. The authors have disclosed no financial relationships related to this article. Submitted January 29, 2020; accepted in revised form March 26, 2020; published ahead of print November 23, 2020.
Objective:
Recent clinical evidence has suggested that certain wound dressings may play a significant role in protocols to prevent or reduce pressure injury (PI) in patients at risk by modifying the pressure, friction, and shear forces that can contribute to PI. The aim of this study was to investigate the pressure reduction properties of commercially available wound dressings in vitro.
Methods:
Using a standardized protocol (1.7 kg, 7.5-cm sphere), testing was performed in a controlled environment by the same clinician using a pressure mapping device (XSENSOR LX205; XSENSOR Technology Corporation, Calgary, Alberta, Canada) to measure and compare the pressure mitigation properties in a variety of wound dressings.
Results:
A total of 13 different commercially available dressings were tested in triplicate for changes in pressure redistribution as compared with the control. One dressing demonstrated the greatest reduction of pressure forces (OxyBand PR; 50.33 ± 1.45 mm Hg) compared with the control (302.7 ± 0.33 mm Hg) and the greatest surface area of all the study dressings tested. There was a negative correlation (R2 = 0.73) between the average pressure distribution of a wound dressing and its contact area. Further, the peak pressure for OxyBand PR (P ≤ .05) was significantly different from all other tested dressings.
Conclusions:
One dressing (OxyBand PR) provided superior pressure redistribution and significantly reduced peak pressure in this study when compared with currently available standard foam and silicone dressings that are marketed for the purpose of PI prevention.
