Pressure Ulcers Stage IIINCT04311229
Effectiveness of Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy
A study testing Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy group and contol group in people with Pressure Ulcers Stage III and Pressure Ulcer, Stage IV, run by Istanbul Medipol University Hospital.
Trial summary
This study aims to compare the effects of Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy and wet-to-dry dressing on Stages 3 and 4 pressure injuries, and to investigate the consistency of Three-Dimensional Wound Measurement Device findings with Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing Tool scores. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 79 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Pressure Ulcers Stage III, Pressure Ulcer, Stage IV
- What is being tested?
- Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy group and contol group
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 30 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 13 Oct 2016to 30 Apr 2017
- 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 18 to 79 years
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- having class III or IV pressure ulcer
- being ≥18 years old,
- not having time/access constraints,
- voluntariness.
Who cannot join
- Stage I and Stage II pressure ulcers,
- cancer,
- increased risk of bleeding,
- osteomyelitis,
- corticosteroid treatment
- consciousness and
- contraindications of NPWT
About this study
Official title: Effectiveness of Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy Compared to Wet-Dry Dressing in Pressure Injuries
This study aims to compare the effects of Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy and wet-to-dry dressing on Stages 3 and 4 pressure injuries, and to investigate the consistency of Three-Dimensional Wound Measurement Device findings with Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing Tool scores. This study is a randomized controlled trial. A total of 30 patients with Stages 3 and 4 pressure injuries were included in the study. The patients were divided into two groups: the experimental group or Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy group and the control or wet-to-dry dressing group. All patients received 3 rounds of treatment. Data were collected with a Patient Identification Form, Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing Tool and the findings of Three-Dimensional Wound Measurement Device. We found that granulation tissue formation was more significant in the experimental group (p < .05), and that there was more significant wound shrinkage (p < .05) with a more significant decrease in the Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing Tool scores (p < .05). The wounds were assessed with the Tool and the Three-Dimensional Wound Measurement device. Device measurements were found to be correlated with Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing Tool Tool findings (p < .05) There was a significant correlation between device-measured granulation findings and PUSH Tool score results of the experimental group's third measurements (p < .05). We conclude that Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy is an effective treatment method for pressure injuries, and Three-Dimensional Wound Measurement device is an usable wound assessment tool.
Read the detailed description
Pressure injuries are a major health problem in that they are difficult to treat, reduce the patients' quality of life, and increase length of hospital stay and overall health care costs. Furthermore, several possible wound healing complications, such as infections, can lead to mortality. That said, the prevalence of pressure injuries is an important indicator of quality in hospitals. Pressure injuries do not only impact health, but also cause social isolation and dependency, resulting in further psychological problems.
Our review of the literature revealed that the incidence of pressure ulcers varies between 0.4% and 38% in hospitalized patients, between 2.2 and 23.9% in intensive care units and between 0-17% in home care. NPUAP (National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel) reports that the cost of treating pressure ulcers has been gradually increasing. It was estimated that treating pressure injuries costs around $11 billion annually in the United States alone. Treating a pressure ulcer can cost anywhere between $500 to $70,000, the most substantial fraction being nursing services. In the UK, it costs £1,064 to treat a Stage 1 pressure injury, and this number can reach £10,551 for more advanced ulcers. This illustrates the direct link between the stage of pressure injury and the cost of treatment. On average, it costs the UK healthcare system £1.4-2.1 billion annually to treat pressure ulcers.
There are many products and methods available for pressure ulcer treatment, but the most well-known and most commonly preferred method is wet-to-dry dressing. That said, researchers have tried and developed several novel methods for the treatment of pressure injuries including NPWT (Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy), hyperbaric oxygen therapy, ultrasonography, hydrotherapy, magnetic field therapy, ultraviolet rays, electrical stimulation, phototherapy and growth hormone application. Together with these non-invasive treatment methods, surgical intervention can also be a treatment option, especially for non-healing wounds. The European and US National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panels' (EPUAP and NPUAP) guidelines recommend NPWT for deep-tissue pressure injuries, namely Stages 3 and 4, as a supportive tool for early-stage treatment. This method is based on applying negative pressure to promote wound healing. Several studies report that NPWT increases granulation tissue formation and reduces wound area. It is indicated that NPWT provides continuous and effective wound debridement in the wound area and increases blood supply to the wound.
Pressure injuries are among the most significant current health problems that are handled by a medical nurse. As the primary caregiver for the hospitalized patient, the nurse must prioritize preventing wound formation and eliminating any risk factors. If a pressure sore does form, the primary goal is to plan and implement appropriate care and nursing interventions in collaboration with the patient and their family to ensure proper wound healing .
It is the nurse's responsibility to keep up with scientific developments in patient care and try to integrate them into their work. PUSH is a tool that is used for monitoring pressure ulcers; however, it has yet to become a part of routine practice in Turkey. The Three-Dimensional Wound Management (3-DWM) device has been used in medical service since 2015, but with only a limited number of studies that evaluate its effectiveness. Currently, the wet-to-dry dressing method is the most commonly preferred treatment method for wound care in Turkish healthcare. There are indeed numerous studies that demonstrate the effectiveness of wet dressings in wound healing. Wet dressings provide the appropriate medium for the accumulation of patient's own body fluids between wound surface and dressing while preventing dehydration. This study aims to compare the effects of Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT) and wet-to-dry dressing on Stages 3 and 4 pressure injuries, and to investigate the consistency of 3-DWM device measurement findings with PUSH Tool scores.
- Being tested
- Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy group, contol group
- Keywords
- Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy, Pressure injuries, vacuum assisted closure, wound care, Wound Measurement
- Medical subject headings
- Pressure Ulcer
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy groupDevice
The wounds were initially evaluated for any necrotic findings and debrided if needed, and then washed with an antiseptic solution. 3-DWM was used to measure the pressure sores by taking pictures.The length and width of wounds were measured with disposable paper rulers. Wound depth was determined in centimeters with a sterile cotton-tip applicator by measuring against a ruler. The wound was closed using a Wound Care Kit that includes foam dressing, film drape, TRAC pad with tubing and a drainage canister. Foam material was placed inside the wound and was attached to the canister through tubing.The canister was attached to the Vacuum-Assisted Closure device, which is a portable device that applies intermittent or continuous negative pressure.The device was operated at 125 mmHg pressure for 5 minutes with and 2 minutes without active vacuum.Wound dressings were changed every 48 hours.Wound area was measured after all three rounds of treatment.
contol groupOther
Wounds were finally covered with gauze dressing soaked with saline. Wounds were treated three times a day, and measurements were repeated every 48 hours. Every wound was measured a total of four times: one pre-treatment (baseline) and three post-treatment measurements.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy group | Experimental | NPWT was applied three times for Class III and pressure ulcers. An initial pre-treatment measurement was used as a baseline, followed by three post-treatment measurements after each round to evaluate wound healing. A total of four measurements were performed for each subject. Wound healing was measured using the PUSH Tool and the 3DWM device in both groups. Receives: Device: Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy group |
| CONTROL GROUP | Other | wet to dry dressing group Receives: Other: contol group |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Granulation tissue formation and wound shrinkage
Granulation tissue formation (%) and wound shrinkage (cm²) in experimental and control groups
Measured: 8 week
PUSH tool and 3-DWM measurement findings
Wound area assessed by PUSH tool and wound area and granulation tissue assessed by 3-DWM device
Measured: 8 week
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted17 Mar 2020
- Study start13 Oct 2016
- Primary completion30 Apr 2017
- Study completion30 Apr 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (4)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Pressure Ulcers Stage IIIStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Istanbul Medipol University HospitalThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
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
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Model description
- REPEATIVE MEASUREMENT EXPERİMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Istanbul Medipol University Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- EZGİ ARAYAN, Msc, Principal investigator, BAŞKENT ÜNİVERSİTESİ İSTANBUL SAĞLIK UYGULAMA VE RAŞTIRMA MERKEZİSELDA RIZALAR, Assoc.Prof., Study director, İSTANBUL MEDİPOL ÜNİVERSİTESİEMRE ÖZKER, Assoc.Prof., Study director, BAŞKENT ÜNİVERSİTESİ İSTANBUL SAĞLIK UYGULAMA VE RAŞTIRMA MERKEZİ
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04311229
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 20052020
- Status last verified
- Feb 2020
- First submitted
- 28 Feb 2020
- Last updated
- 17 Mar 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: to publish the article
Publications
Ersilia LA, Anagha K, Thomas EB, KAthryn MM, John SS, Karen KE, Paul JK, Christopher EA, Reliability of a novel 3D Wound Measurement Device, 2015
Bills JD, Berriman SJ, Noble DL, Lavery LA, Davis KE. Pilot study to evaluate a novel three-dimensional wound measurement device. Int Wound J. 2016 Dec;13(6):1372-1377. doi: 10.1111/iwj.12534. Epub 2015 Nov 11.
PubMed 26558349Moues CM, van den Bemd GJ, Heule F, Hovius SE. Comparing conventional gauze therapy to vacuum-assisted closure wound therapy: a prospective randomised trial. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2007;60(6):672-81. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2006.01.041. Epub 2006 Jun 22.
PubMed 17485058Sinha K, Chauhan VD, Maheshwari R, Chauhan N, Rajan M, Agrawal A. Vacuum Assisted Closure Therapy versus Standard Wound Therapy for Open Musculoskeletal Injuries. Adv Orthop. 2013;2013:245940. doi: 10.1155/2013/245940. Epub 2013 Jun 26.
PubMed 23878741
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 17 Mar 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effectiveness of Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy Compared to Wet-Dry Dressing in Pressure Injuries
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04311229
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 20052020
- Keywords
- Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy, Pressure injuries, vacuum assisted closure, wound care, Wound Measurement
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Istanbul Medipol University HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 13 Oct 2016 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Apr 2017 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Apr 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 17 Mar 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study aims to compare the effects of Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy and wet-to-dry dressing on Stages 3 and 4 pressure injuries, and to investigate the consistency of Three-Dimensional Wound Measurement Device findings with Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing Tool scores. This study is a randomized controlled trial. A total of 30 patients with Stages 3 and 4 pressure injuries were included in the study. The patients were divided into two groups: the experimental group or Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy group and the control or wet-to-dry dressing group. All patients received 3 rounds of treatment. Data were collected with a Patient Identification Form, Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing Tool and the findings of Three-Dimensional Wound Measurement Device. We found that granulation tissue formation was more significant in the experimental group (p < .05), and that there was more significant wound shrinkage (p < .05) with a more significant decrease in the Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing Tool scores (p < .05). The wounds were assessed with the Tool and the Three-Dimensional Wound Measurement device. Device measurements were found to be correlated with Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing Tool Tool findings (p < .05) There was a significant correlation between device-measured granulation findings and PUSH Tool score results of the experimental group's third measurements (p < .05). We conclude that Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy is an effective treatment method for pressure injuries, and Three-Dimensional Wound Measurement device is an usable wound assessment tool.
Detailed description
Pressure injuries are a major health problem in that they are difficult to treat, reduce the patients' quality of life, and increase length of hospital stay and overall health care costs. Furthermore, several possible wound healing complications, such as infections, can lead to mortality. That said, the prevalence of pressure injuries is an important indicator of quality in hospitals. Pressure injuries do not only impact health, but also cause social isolation and dependency, resulting in further psychological problems.
Our review of the literature revealed that the incidence of pressure ulcers varies between 0.4% and 38% in hospitalized patients, between 2.2 and 23.9% in intensive care units and between 0-17% in home care. NPUAP (National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel) reports that the cost of treating pressure ulcers has been gradually increasing. It was estimated that treating pressure injuries costs around $11 billion annually in the United States alone. Treating a pressure ulcer can cost anywhere between $500 to $70,000, the most substantial fraction being nursing services. In the UK, it costs £1,064 to treat a Stage 1 pressure injury, and this number can reach £10,551 for more advanced ulcers. This illustrates the direct link between the stage of pressure injury and the cost of treatment. On average, it costs the UK healthcare system £1.4-2.1 billion annually to treat pressure ulcers.
There are many products and methods available for pressure ulcer treatment, but the most well-known and most commonly preferred method is wet-to-dry dressing. That said, researchers have tried and developed several novel methods for the treatment of pressure injuries including NPWT (Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy), hyperbaric oxygen therapy, ultrasonography, hydrotherapy, magnetic field therapy, ultraviolet rays, electrical stimulation, phototherapy and growth hormone application. Together with these non-invasive treatment methods, surgical intervention can also be a treatment option, especially for non-healing wounds. The European and US National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panels' (EPUAP and NPUAP) guidelines recommend NPWT for deep-tissue pressure injuries, namely Stages 3 and 4, as a supportive tool for early-stage treatment. This method is based on applying negative pressure to promote wound healing. Several studies report that NPWT increases granulation tissue formation and reduces wound area. It is indicated that NPWT provides continuous and effective wound debridement in the wound area and increases blood supply to the wound.
Pressure injuries are among the most significant current health problems that are handled by a medical nurse. As the primary caregiver for the hospitalized patient, the nurse must prioritize preventing wound formation and eliminating any risk factors. If a pressure sore does form, the primary goal is to plan and implement appropriate care and nursing interventions in collaboration with the patient and their family to ensure proper wound healing .
It is the nurse's responsibility to keep up with scientific developments in patient care and try to integrate them into their work. PUSH is a tool that is used for monitoring pressure ulcers; however, it has yet to become a part of routine practice in Turkey. The Three-Dimensional Wound Management (3-DWM) device has been used in medical service since 2015, but with only a limited number of studies that evaluate its effectiveness. Currently, the wet-to-dry dressing method is the most commonly preferred treatment method for wound care in Turkish healthcare. There are indeed numerous studies that demonstrate the effectiveness of wet dressings in wound healing. Wet dressings provide the appropriate medium for the accumulation of patient's own body fluids between wound surface and dressing while preventing dehydration. This study aims to compare the effects of Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT) and wet-to-dry dressing on Stages 3 and 4 pressure injuries, and to investigate the consistency of 3-DWM device measurement findings with PUSH Tool scores.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, investigator)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- REPEATIVE MEASUREMENT EXPERİMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy group | Experimental | Device: Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy groupNPWT was applied three times for Class III and pressure ulcers. An initial pre-treatment measurement was used as a baseline, followed by three post-treatment measurements after each round to evaluate wound healing. A total of four measurements were performed for each subject. Wound healing was measured using the PUSH Tool and the 3DWM device in both groups. |
| CONTROL GROUP | Other | Other: contol groupwet to dry dressing group |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 79 years
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- having class III or IV pressure ulcer
- being ≥18 years old,
- not having time/access constraints,
- voluntariness.
Key exclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Stage I and Stage II pressure ulcers,
- cancer,
- increased risk of bleeding,
- osteomyelitis,
- corticosteroid treatment
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy groupThe wounds were initially evaluated for any necrotic findings and debrided if needed, and then washed with an antiseptic solution. 3-DWM was used to measure the pressure sores by taking pictures.The length and width of wounds were measured with disposable paper rulers. Wound depth was determined in centimeters with a sterile cotton-tip applicator by measuring against a ruler. The wound was closed using a Wound Care Kit that includes foam dressing, film drape, TRAC pad with tubing and a drainage canister. Foam material was placed inside the wound and was attached to the canister through tubing.The canister was attached to the Vacuum-Assisted Closure device, which is a portable device that applies intermittent or continuous negative pressure.The device was operated at 125 mmHg pressure for 5 minutes with and 2 minutes without active vacuum.Wound dressings were changed every 48 hours.Wound area was measured after all three rounds of treatment. | Device | Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy group |
| contol groupWounds were finally covered with gauze dressing soaked with saline. Wounds were treated three times a day, and measurements were repeated every 48 hours. Every wound was measured a total of four times: one pre-treatment (baseline) and three post-treatment measurements. | Other | CONTROL GROUP |
Primary outcome
Granulation tissue formation and wound shrinkage
Time frame: 8 week
Granulation tissue formation (%) and wound shrinkage (cm²) in experimental and control groups
PUSH tool and 3-DWM measurement findings
Time frame: 8 week
Wound area assessed by PUSH tool and wound area and granulation tissue assessed by 3-DWM device
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 17 Mar 2020.
- BackgroundErsilia LA, Anagha K, Thomas EB, KAthryn MM, John SS, Karen KE, Paul JK, Christopher EA, Reliability of a novel 3D Wound Measurement Device, 2015
- Background: PubMed 26558349Bills JD, Berriman SJ, Noble DL, Lavery LA, Davis KE. Pilot study to evaluate a novel three-dimensional wound measurement device. Int Wound J. 2016 Dec;13(6):1372-1377. doi: 10.1111/iwj.12534. Epub 2015 Nov 11.
- Background: PubMed 17485058Moues CM, van den Bemd GJ, Heule F, Hovius SE. Comparing conventional gauze therapy to vacuum-assisted closure wound therapy: a prospective randomised trial. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2007;60(6):672-81. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2006.01.041. Epub 2006 Jun 22.
- Background: PubMed 23878741Sinha K, Chauhan VD, Maheshwari R, Chauhan N, Rajan M, Agrawal A. Vacuum Assisted Closure Therapy versus Standard Wound Therapy for Open Musculoskeletal Injuries. Adv Orthop. 2013;2013:245940. doi: 10.1155/2013/245940. Epub 2013 Jun 26.
- NPUAP (NationalPressureUlcerAdvisory Panel). "Prevention and Treatment of Pressure Ulcers: Quick Reference Guide".Link provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. to publish the article
Related trials for Pressure Ulcers Stage III
Not yet recruitingEarly Phase 1
Efficacy of a Polyhexanide Biguanide-Based Gel in the Prevention of Biofilm Formation in Pressure Ulcers
Pressure Ulcers, Pressure Ulcers Stage III
Recruiting
Comparison of Transforming Powder Dressing to NPIAP Recommended Standard of Care Therapies in Stage 2, 3 and 4 Pressure Injuries
Pressure Ulcers Stage II, Pressure Ulcers Stage III
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
EZGİ ARAYAN, Msc principal investigator
BAŞKENT ÜNİVERSİTESİ İSTANBUL SAĞLIK UYGULAMA VE RAŞTIRMA MERKEZİ
SELDA RIZALAR, Assoc.Prof. study director
İSTANBUL MEDİPOL ÜNİVERSİTESİ
EMRE ÖZKER, Assoc.Prof. study director
BAŞKENT ÜNİVERSİTESİ İSTANBUL SAĞLIK UYGULAMA VE RAŞTIRMA MERKEZİ
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy group and contol group in people with Pressure Ulcers Stage III and Pressure Ulcer, Stage IV, run by Istanbul Medipol University Hospital.
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 17 Mar 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
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?
Granulation tissue formation and wound shrinkage (time frame: 8 week). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT04311229, which also lists 4 linked publications.
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 17 Mar 2020.