Skip to main content
. 2017 Oct 12;2017(10):CD011332. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011332.pub2

3. Summary of outcomes.

Study Intervention Comparator Follow‐up (weeks) Incidence of healed PU Time to complete
healing
Adverse
events
Reduction
in ulcer size
Quality of life Patient satisfaction PU recurrence Pain Economic
Bale 1997 Polyurethane foam (n = 29) Hydrocolloid (n = 31) 4
Bale 1998 Hydrocellular foam (n = 17) Hydrocolloid (n = 15) 8 ✓ Data not separated by wound type ✓ Data not separated by wound type
Banks 1994a Polyurethane foam (n = 26) Knitted viscous secured with a vapour‐permeable film dressing (n = 24) 12
Meaume 2003 Silicone polyurethane foam (n = 18) Hydropolymer foam (n = 20) 8
Payne 2009 Polyurethane foam (n = 20) Saline‐soaked gauze (n = 16) 4
Seeley 1999 Hydrocellular foam (n = 20) Hydrocolloid (n = 19) 8
Sopata 2002 Polyurethane foam (n = 17) Hydrogel (n = 17) 8
Souliotis 2016 Foam dressings, foam with silver, silver‐sulfadiazine and ibuprofen (n = 47) Plain and saline‐soaked gauze (n = 48) Until complete healing (less than 24 weeks)
Thomas 1997 Hydropolymer (n = 50) Hydrocolloid (n = 49) 6 ✓ Data not separated by wound type