AzTrials
AzTrials

Acute and Chronic WoundsNCT01885273

Is Pressurized Irrigation an Effective Alternative to Swabbing for Wound Cleansing?

A study testing Pressurized irrigation method and Swabbing wound cleansing method in people with Acute and Chronic Wounds, run by Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, Hong Kong at 1 site in China.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The study is to examine the effectiveness of cleansing wound with pressurized irrigation method compared with conventional practice of swabbing on the wound healing and infection of acute and chronic wound, and to evaluate the patient's physical symptoms related to wound, patient's satisfaction to cleansing method… Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 14 to 75 years
Conditions the study is for
Acute and Chronic Wounds
What is being tested?
Pressurized irrigation method and Swabbing wound cleansing method
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
256 participants
Where
1 siteChina
Study dates
Apr 2008to Aug 2010
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 14 to 75 years
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Had wounds to be healed by secondary intention,
  • could speak Chinese,
  • with an abbreviated mental test score 7 or above indicating their normal cognitive ability; and
  • being able to be accessible for wound cleansing and evaluation follow up.

Who cannot join

  • Unbroken skin;
  • Full-thickness skin loss and damage to muscle, bone or/and any supporting structures (e.g. tendon, joint capsule);
  • Wounds with a sinus where the base of the wound is not visible;
  • Wounds to be healed by primary intention (e.g. sutured wound, skin grafts and skin-graft donor sites);
  • Wound that was prescribed to be cleansed by irrigation;
  • Patient with more than one wound;
  • Patients with a very poor life expectancy or with a clinical condition that might interfere with wound healing such as active carcinoma, vasculitis, use of systemic corticosteroids, immunosuppressive agents, radiation therapy or chemotherapy within the past 30 days.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

China1 site
  • New Territories East Cluster Nursing Hospital Authority

    Hong Kong

Other trials in China

About this study

Official title: A Multicenter, Prospective, Randomised Controlled Trial to Compare the Pressurized Irrigation Method With Conventional Practice of Swabbing for Wound Cleansing

The study is to examine the effectiveness of cleansing wound with pressurized irrigation method compared with conventional practice of swabbing on the wound healing and infection of acute and chronic wound, and to evaluate the patient's physical symptoms related to wound, patient's satisfaction to cleansing method, and cost of materials used between the two groups.

Patients with acute or chronic non-sutured wounds as well as being eligible to exclusion criteria will be recruited and randomly assigned to be cleansed using either: pressurized irrigation method (experimental group) or swabbing method (control group).

Read more

244 patients will be recruited in the study. This will take place in four community health centres run by the Hospital Authority in Hong Kong. The wounds of participants will be cleansed using the assigned method for a six week period. The clinic staff nurse is responsible for the ongoing assessment of the wound.

Wound assessment will be undertaken at enrolment and upon healing of the wound or at the end of six-week period if the wounds have not healed. Demographic data and information related to the wound -wound size +/- wound volume, wound culture swab, and symptoms -wound discomfort, pain and odour will be collected at enrolment. Information related to the wound and subjective measures of patient satisfaction -feeling of cleanliness, liking, and of staff satisfaction -feeling user-friendliness, accessibility, cleanliness, liking to the cleansing method using VAS will be assessed at completion of treatment. A list of cost measurements for the wound cleansing would also be captured.

Read the detailed description
  • Registration/ randomization procedure:

Once patients are identified as potential participants at their outpatient clinic visit, the research nurse will initiate the enrolment process by explaining the objectives of the proposed study to the patient. Informed consents are obtained for eligible subjects. A thorough assessment and measurement of the wound will be done by another research nurse. Participants are asked to complete the first questionnaire. Participants are then randomized to either intervention or control group. Randomization will be done by a randomization list generated by a statistician using a simple randomization method and programmed in a designated computer.

  • Schema of intervention delivery and data collection:

The wounds of participants in control group and study group will be cleansed following to the allocated method until the wounds are completely healed or for six weeks if the wounds have not yet healed. Wound-care specialists and microbiologists will be consulted throughout the study for technical advice, particularly on information not readily available in the literature. Decisions relating to the time period needed to detect wound infection and healing, as well as the investigations required to detect wound infection, are made in consultation with this group.

The first research nurse will undertake wound cleansing for experimental group. Wound cleansing in control group is done as usual by the staff nurses in the four designated clinics, who will attend an education programme which explains the details of the study, the procedures to be followed, and the patient documentation. The first research nurse and the clinic nurse who undertakes dressing change are responsible for the ongoing assessment of the wound during cleansing and recording the information on the volume of solution and amount of cleansing materials used, frequency of dressing changes and the type of dressing applied at each visit. Participants are instructed to report any signs of infection to the first research nurse and the clinic nurse or physician. The second research nurse who is blinded to the wound cleansing method will undertake data collection and wound assessment for all subjects at enrollment and upon healing of the wound or at the end of six-week period if the wounds have not yet healed. Wounds that have not healed at the end of the six-week period will be reassessed and data relating to the wound characteristics are recorded.

  • Criteria for study discontinuation:

Participants may be discontinued from the study and assessments at any time. Criteria of premature withdrawal from trial include 1) Voluntary discontinuation by the participants without prejudice to further care; 2) Participants lost to follow up. For withdrawal from trial treatment: 1) Any surgical intervention to the wounds as required; 2) Safety reasons as judged by investigator; 3) Severe non compliance to the protocol as judged by the investigator, these patients will be followed to trial completion. Investigators should document the reasons for withdrawal in patient notes. The decision of withdrawal would not affect further wound care management.

  • Statistical analysis:

The time to wound-healing is analyzed using Cox regression analysis. An intent-to-treat principle will be applied in the analysis. Patients' time-to-wound-healing are censored at the time of consent withdrawal, dead or lost to follow up. The difference between the two arms is assessed using Cox model. Repeated measures ANOVA is performed to compare the effects of intervention (vs. control) and time (6 week post randomization) on mean wound size change. The differences in wound symptoms and patient's satisfaction and comfort to cleansing method are analyzed using Wilcoxon Rank Sum Test. Chi-square test is used to test difference in the infection incidence and the proportion of wounds completely healed during follow up between the two groups. Prognostic factors are assessed and adjusted using a Cox proportional hazard regression model. These variables are: age, body mass index (calculated from participants' height and weight), wound characteristics (location, types, wound size), wound status (assessed by Wound Status Assessment score), smoking, presence of underlying disease, concomitant medication and mental status (assessed by AMT).

  • Recruitment schedule:

For the purpose of easy operation and avoiding too many patients accumulated at the same time, recruitment will be done separately in 10 cycles. The first research nurse need to perform wound dressing in experimental group for 2 patients per hour, thus 12-13 patients a day. It will be stopped as soon as 26 patients are recruited in the first week of each cycle so as to facilitate spreading the attending time of patients in the coming 6-week wound cleansing visits, therefore they do not need to wait long. That means it takes 2 months to accomplish recruitment plus 6 weeks wound cleansing and data collection for 24-26 subjects, therefore 20 months is required for 244 subjects. It is envisaged that the study will take 24 months.

Being tested
Pressurized irrigation method, Swabbing wound cleansing method
Keywords
pressurized irrigation, wound cleansing method, irrigation, swabbing, appropriate pressure for irrigation

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Pressurized irrigation methodProcedure or surgery

    The pressurized irrigation device is modified from using a special Syringe, connected to Gomco's Vacuum/Pressure Pump Model 309 that generate steady irrigation stream at pressure between 4 to 15 psi that is recommended to be safe and effective pressure for wound cleansing.

  • Swabbing wound cleansing methodProcedure or surgery

    All patients in control group had wounds cleansed with swabbing technique using forceps and cotton wool (in sterile dressing pack)

Study groups in NCT01885273
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Pressurized irrigation methodExperimentalCleansing wound with pressurized irrigation technique using a pressurized irrigation device.
Receives: Procedure: Pressurized irrigation method
Swabbing wound cleansing methodActive comparatorAll patients in control group had wounds cleansed with swabbing technique using forceps and cotton wool (in sterile dressing pack), and received the 'standardized usual care'. Frequency of dressing change depended on the amount of exudates.
Receives: Procedure: Swabbing wound cleansing method

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. time-to-wound healing

    Complete healing is defined as complete coverage of the wound with epithelial tissue. Patient's wound that was observed to completely heal was referred for a wound check by second research nurse who was blinded to the intervention method. Healing time was indicated by number of days before complete skin integrity returned.

    Measured: during the follow up within six-week period if the wounds have not yet healed

Secondary outcomes (1)
  1. infection rate during follow up

    A set of criteria was used to facilitate the research nurses and the clinic nurses in identifying any signs of wound infection. The criteria include (a) abscess; (b) cellulitis; (c) discharge (serous exudates with inflammation; pus); (d) delayed healing (compared with normal rate); (e) Friable granulation tissue that bleeds easily; (f) unexpected pain/ tenderness; (g) bridging/ pocketing at base of wound; (h) abnormal smell; and (i) wound breakdown. When infection was suspected, the case was referred to a physician who was blinded to the method of wound cleansing and study purpose for making the assessment and diagnosis. When antibiotics were prescribed, the drugs information such as name, dosage, duration and reason were captured.

    Measured: During follow up within six-week period if the wounds have not yet healed

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted24 Jun 2013 (estimated)
  2. Study startApr 2008
  3. Primary completionJul 2010
  4. Study completionAug 2010

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Supportive care
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Factorial
Masking
Single blind
Who is masked
Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
256 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT01885273
Sponsor's protocol ID
NRS001
Other IDs
05060011
Status last verified
Jun 2013
First submitted
20 Jun 2013
Last updated
24 Jun 2013
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No

Publications

  • Mak SS, Lee MY, Cheung JS, Choi KC, Chung TK, Wong TW, Lam KY, Lee DT. Pressurised irrigation versus swabbing method in cleansing wounds healed by secondary intention: a randomised controlled trial with cost-effectiveness analysis. Int J Nurs Stud. 2015 Jan;52(1):88-101. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2014.08.005. Epub 2014 Aug 22.

    PubMed 25218264

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Pressurized irrigation method and Swabbing wound cleansing method in people with Acute and Chronic Wounds, run by Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, Hong Kong at 1 site in China.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 7 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 24 Jun 2013. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in China. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

time-to-wound healing (time frame: during the follow up within six-week period if the wounds have not yet healed). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01885273, which also lists 1 linked publication.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 24 Jun 2013.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in