A pilot randomised controlled trial of negative pressure wound therapy to treat grade III/IV pressure ulcers [ISRCTN69032034]

Trials

Nicky Cullum²  David J Torgerson⁵  Nikki Stubbs¹  Elizabeth McGinnis³  Marta O Soares⁴  Jo C Dumville⁵  Rebecca L Ashby⁵ 

[1] NHS Leeds Community Healthcare, St Mary's Hospital, Leeds, UK;School of Nursing, Midwifery & Social Work, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK;Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds General Infirmary, Leeds, UK;Centre for Health Economics, The University of York, York, UK;Department of Health Sciences, The University of York, York, UK

关键词: Pilot randomised controlled trial;    Pressure ulcer;    Negative pressure wound therapy;   

Others  :  1095445
DOI  :  10.1186/1745-6215-13-119

 received in 2011-11-11, accepted in 2012-06-26,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is widely promoted as a treatment for full thickness wounds; however, there is a lack of high-quality research evidence regarding its clinical and cost effectiveness. A trial of NPWT for the treatment of grade III/IV pressure ulcers would be worthwhile but premature without assessing whether such a trial is feasible. The aim of this pilot randomised controlled trial was to assess the feasibility of conducting a future full trial of NPWT for the treatment of grade III and IV pressure ulcers and to pilot all aspects of the trial.

Methods

This was a two-centre (acute and community), pilot randomised controlled trial. Eligible participants were randomised to receive either NPWT or standard care (SC) (spun hydrocolloid, alginate or foam dressings). Outcome measures were time to healing of the reference pressure ulcer, recruitment rates, frequency of treatment visits, resources used and duration of follow-up.

Results

Three hundred and twelve patients were screened for eligibility into this trial over a 12-month recruitment period and 12/312 participants (3.8%) were randomised: 6 to NPWT and 6 to SC. Only one reference pressure ulcer healed (NPWT group) during follow-up (time to healing 79 days). The mean number of treatment visits per week was 3.1 (NPWT) and 5.7 (SC); 6/6 NPWT and 1/6 SC participants withdrew from their allocated trial treatment. The mean duration of follow-up was 3.8 (NPWT) and 5.0 (SC) months.

Conclusions

This pilot trial yielded vital information for the planning of a future full study including projected recruitment rate, required duration of follow-up and extent of research nurse support required. Data were also used to inform the cost-effectiveness and value of information analyses, which were conducted alongside the pilot trial.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN69032034.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Ashby et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1 .

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Banwell PE, Musgrave M: Topical negative pressure therapy: mechanisms and indications. Int Wound J 2004, 1:95-106.
• [2]Centre for Evidence-based Purchasing NHS Purchasing and Supply Agency: Evidence review: Vacuum Assisted Closure (R) therapy. CEP 08017, ; 2008. http://nhscep.useconnect.co.uk/CEPProducts/Catalogue.aspx?ReportType=Evidence+review webcite
• [3]Philbeck TE, Whittington KT, Millsap MH, Briones RB, Wight DG, Schroeder WJ: The clinical and cost effectiveness of externally applied negative pressure wound therapy in the treatment of wounds in home healthcare Medicare patients. Ostomy Wound Manage 1999, 45:41-50.
• [4]Fisher A, Brady B: Vacuum assisted closure therapy. Canadian Coordinating Centre for Health Technology Assessment, ; 2003. http://www.cadth.ca/media/pdf/221_vac_cetap_e.pdf webcite
• [5]Pham C, Middleton P, Maddern G: Vacuum-assisted closure for the management of wounds: an accelerated systematic review. Australian Safety and Efficacy Register of New Interventional Procedures-Surgical, ; 2003. http://www.surgeons.org/media/19301/VACaccelreview1203.pdf webcite
• [6]Gregor S, Maegele M, Sauerland S, Krahn JF, Peinemann F, Lange S: Negative pressure wound therapy: a vacuum of evidence? Arch Surg 2008, 143:189-196.
• [7]Ubbink DT, Westerbos SJ, Evans D, Land L, Vermeulen H: Topical negative pressure for treating chronic wounds. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008, 3:CD001898.
• [8]Vikatmaa P, Juutilainen V, Kuukasjarvi P, Malmivaara A: Negative pressure wound therapy: a systematic review on effectiveness and safety. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2008, 36:438-448.
• [9]Anonymous: Topical negative pressure for chronic wounds? Drug Ther Bull 2007, 45(8):57-61.
• [10]Costa V, Brophy J, McGregor M: Vacuum assisted wound closure therapy (VAC ®). Montreal: Technology Assessment Unit of the McGill University Health Centre (MUHC), (Report no 19), ; 2005. http://www.mcgill.ca/files/tau/NPWT_FINAL.pdf webcite
• [11]National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence: CG74 Surgical site infection. NICE guideline, ; 2008. http://guidance.nice.org.uk/CG74/Guidance/pdf/English webcite
• [12]Ontario Health Technology Advisory Committee: Negative Pressure Wound Therapy. Update Health Technology Policy Assessment, ; 2006. https://ospace.scholarsportal.info/bitstream/1873/1241/1/268546.pdf webcite
• [13]Kaltenthaler E, Whitfield MD, Walters SJ, Akehurst RL, Paisley S: UK, USA and Canada: how do their pressure ulcer prevalence and incidence data compare? J Wound Care 2001, 10:530-535.
• [14]National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: Pressure ulcers - prevention and treatment. 2005. www.nice.org.uk/CG029 webcite
• [15]Pressure Ulcer Treatment Guidelineshttp://www.epuap.org/gltreatment.html webcite
• [16]European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel and National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel: Treatment of pressure ulcers: Quick Reference Guide. National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel, Washington DC; 2009.
• [17]Bennett G, Dealey C, Posnett J: The cost of pressure ulcers in the UK. Age Ageing 2004, 33:230-235.
• [18]Soares M, Dumville JC, Ashby RL, Iglesias C, Bojke L, Adderley U, McGinnis E, Stubbs N, Torgerson D, Claxton K, Cullum N: Methods to assess cost effectiveness and value of further research when data are sparse: negative pressure wound therapy for severe pressure ulcers. Med Decis Making 2012. In press
• [19]McDonald AM, Knight RC, Campbell MK, Entwistle VA, Grant AM, Cook JA, Elbourne DR, Francis D, Garcia J, Roberts I, Snowdon C: What influences recruitment to randomised controlled trials? A review of trials funded by two UK funding agencies. Trials 2006, 7:9.
• [20]Negative Pressure Wound Therapy for the Treatment of Chronic Pressure Wounds (NPWT). http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00691821 webcite
• [21]Thabane L, Ma J, Chu R, Cheng J, Ismaila A, Rios LP, Robson R, Thabane M, Giangregorio L, Goldsmith CH: A tutorial on pilot studies: the what, why and how. BMC Med Res Methodol 2010, 10:1. BioMed Central Full Text
• [22]Van Teijlingen ER, Hundley V: The Importance of Pilot Studies. Social Research Update, ; 2001. http://sru.soc.surrey.ac.uk/SRU35.html webcite
• [23]Feeley N, Cossette S, Cote J, Heon M, Stremler R, Martorella G, Purden M: The importance of piloting an RCT intervention. Can J Nurs Res 2009, 41:85-99.
• [24]Soares MO, Bojke L, Dumville J, Iglesias C, Cullum N, Claxton K: Methods to elicit experts' beliefs over uncertain quantities: application to a cost effectiveness transition model of negative pressure wound therapy for severe pressure ulceration. Stat Med 2011, 30:2363-2380.
• [25]KCI: VAC (R) ATS User manual (M6252203 Rev F edition). Kinetic Concepts Inc, San Antonio, Texas; 2002.
• [26]KCI: VAC (R) Freedom User's guide (320066 Rev E edition). Kinetic Concepts Inc, San Antonio, Texas; 2005.
• [27]KCI: Acti VAC (R) Therapy System User Manual (340075 Rev D edition). Kinetic Concepts Inc, San Antonio, Texas; 2007.
• [28]KCI: VAC (R) Therapy safety information. Kinetic Concepts Inc, San Antonio, Texas; 2007.
• [29]Safety reports for all other research. http://www.nres.npsa.nhs.uk/applications/after-ethical-review/safetyreports/safety-reports-for-all-other-research/ webcite
• [30]Key Figures for 2001 Census: Census Area Statistics. http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/LeadKeyFigures.do?a=7&b=276810&c=leeds&d=13&e=16&g=382631&i=1001x1003x1004&m=0&r=1&s=1316090325889&enc=1 webcite
• [31]Dumville JC, Worthy G, Bland JM, Cullum N, Dowson C, Iglesias C, Mitchell JL, Nelson EA, Soares MO, Torgerson DJ: Larval therapy for leg ulcers (VenUS II): randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2009, 338:b773.
• [32]Nelson EA, Iglesias CP, Cullum N, Torgerson DJ: Randomized clinical trial of four-layer and short-stretch compression bandages for venous leg ulcers (VenUS I). Br J Surg 2004, 91:1292-1299.
• [33]Watson JM, Kang'ombe AR, Soares MO, Chuang LH, Worthy G, Bland JM, Iglesias C, Cullum N, Torgerson D, Nelson EA: Use of weekly, low dose, high frequency ultrasound for hard to heal venous leg ulcers: the VenUS III randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2011, 342:d1092.
• [34]Gupta S, Baharestani M, Baranoski S, de Leon J, Engel SJ, Mendez-Eastman S, Niezgoda JA, Pompeo MQ: Guidelines for managing pressure ulcers with negative pressure wound therapy. Adv Skin Wound Care 2004, 17(Suppl 2):1-16.
• [35]Mental Capacity Act. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/9/contents webcite
• [36]Mason S, Barrow H, Phillips A, Eddison G, Nelson A, Cullum N, Nixon J: Brief report on the experience of using proxy consent for incapacitated adults. J Med Ethics 2006, 32:61-62.
• [37]Payne WG, Bhalla R, Hill DP, Pierpont YN, Robson MC: Wound healing trajectories to determine pressure ulcer treatment efficacy. Eplasty 2011, 11:e1.
• [38]British Pain Society and British Geriatrics Society: Guidance on: The assessment of pain in older people. 2007. http://www.bgs.org.uk/Publications/Publication%20Downloads/Sep2007PainAssessment.pdf webcite
• [39]Gorecki C, Lamping DL, Brown JM, Madill A, Firth J, Nixon J: Development of a conceptual framework of health-related quality of life in pressure ulcers: a patient-focused approach. Int J Nurs Stud 2010, 47:1525-1534.
• [40]Pieper B, Langemo D, Cuddigan J: Pressure ulcer pain: a systematic literature review and national pressure ulcer advisory panel white paper. Ostomy Wound Manage 2009, 55:16-31.
• [41]Lucas C, Classen J, Harrison D, De H: Pressure ulcer surface area measurement using instant full-scale photography and transparency tracings. Adv Skin Wound Care 2002, 15:17-23.
• [42]Essex HN, Clark M, Sims J, Warriner A, Cullum N: Health-related quality of life in hospital inpatients with pressure ulceration: assessment using generic health-related quality of life measures. Wound Repair Regen 2009, 17:797-805.
• [43]Malley J, Caiels J, Fox D, McCarthy M, Smith N, Beadle-Brown J, Netten A, Towers A-M: A report on the developmental studies for the National Adult Social Care User Experience Survey. , Canterbury; 2010. http://www.pssru.ac.uk/pdf/dp2721.pdf webcite
• [44]Litchfield J, Freeman J, Schou H, Elsley M, Fuller R, Chubb B: Is the future for clinical trials internet-based? A cluster randomized clinical trial. Clin Trials 2005, 2:72-79.
• [45]Pavlovic I, Kern T, Miklavcic D: Comparison of paper-based and electronic data collection process in clinical trials: costs simulation study. Contemp Clin Trials 2009, 30:300-316.
• [46]Pavlovic I, Miklavcic D: Web-based electronic data collection system to support electrochemotherapy clinical trial. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 2007, 11:222-230.
• [47]Godwin M, Ruhland L, Casson I, MacDonald S, Delva D, Birtwhistle R, Lam M, Seguin R: Pragmatic controlled clinical trials in primary care: the struggle between external and internal validity. BMC Med Res Methodol 2003, 3:28. BioMed Central Full Text
• [48]Thorpe KE, Zwarenstein M, Oxman AD, Treweek S, Furberg CD, Altman DG, Tunis S, Bergel E, Harvey I, Magid DJ, Chalkidou K: A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers. J Clin Epidemiol 2009, 62:464-475.