Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 16, 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
Evaluation of Shear Force Redistribution and Microclimate in Foam Dressings Indicated for Pressure Injury Prevention
Sandra Guzman1, Kasey Call, Marianne Russon
1Sandra Guzman, PhD, is Senior Test Engineer, EC-Service Inc., Centerville, Utah, USA; Kasey Call, BS, is Study Director, EC-Service Inc.; Marianne Russon, BA, is Quality Manager, EC-Service Inc.; Susan Jellum, MSN, APRN, FNP-C, is Human Subject Research, EC-Service Inc.; Jordan Fisk, MSc, is Senior Design Scientist, Convatec Ltd., Deeside, Flintshire, UK; and Evan Call, MS, CSM (NRM), is Faculty, Weber State University, Ogden, Utah.
Objective:
To understand the performance of a border and silicone version of a next-generation multilayered foam dressing (dressings A and B) compared with three commercially available wound dressings (dressings C, D, and E) in bench tests relevant for pressure injuries.
Methods:
Two methods were used. The first measured shear force transmission through dressings in low- and high-shear force scenarios compared with a control with no dressing. The second measured the dressings' microclimate (heat and moisture) compared with two controls: one with high moisture output and one with no moisture output. Statistical significance was determined using a 95% CI and t test with α = .05.
Results:
In the low-shear scenario, dressing A showed the lowest force transmission, whereas dressing B was not significantly different from dressings C and E. In the high-shear scenario, dressing D had a significantly higher percentage of transmitted forces compared with the other dressings, with dressing A showing the lowest force transmission but no significant differences among the other three dressings. Regarding microclimate, dressing A showed no significant difference in relative humidity in the dressing-indenter and dressing-surface interfaces, suggesting good breathability. Dressing E had the highest temperature at the indenter-dressing interface, significantly different from the other dressings ( P < .05).
Conclusions:
The study found that a next-generation foam dressing (dressing A) had better breathability and lower shear force transmission than other available dressings. This study emphasized the importance of understanding the physical properties of dressings to choose the most appropriate product based on individual patient needs, wound characteristics, and environmental conditions.
