Catalogue

Record Details

Catalogue Search


Back To Results
Showing Item 2 of 648

Antiseptics versus potable water for wound cleansing a review of the clinical effectiveness and guidelines  Cover Image E-book E-book

Antiseptics versus potable water for wound cleansing a review of the clinical effectiveness and guidelines

Summary: A wound is a disruption of the skin, and alters the normal structure and function of the skin. Approximately 1.5% of the population may have a wound of some kind at any one point and time. There are numerous types of wounds, the types of wounds include simple laceration, complicated lacerations, large tissue defects, burns, pressure ulcers, diabetic foot ulcers and venous ulcers. The process of wound cleansing involves the application of a fluid to remove debris, wound discharge and metabolic wastes, to generate the ideal conditions for wound healing. Wounds are cleansed to remove foreign bodies such as debris and excess exudate, necrotic tissues, which could become a focus for infection. Wound cleansing is a vital component of wound bed preparation, however, how a wound should be cleansed and what types of fluid should be used to clean a wound remain a topic of debate. Currently, healthcare professionals primarily depend on ritualistic practice rather than research evidence. Normal saline (0.9%) has been viewed by some as the favoured wound cleansing solution; this is because it is an isotonic solution and does not interfere with the normal healing process, damage tissue, cause sensitization or allergies or alter the normal bacterial flora of the skin. Tap water has also been recommended as it has advantages of being efficient, cost-effective and accessible. However, clinicians have been warned against using tap water to clean wounds that have bone or tendon is exposed, in those cases normal saline is preferred. However, the reason for this recommendation is unclear. As the debate over which solution to use for wound cleansing continues, it remains unclear which solutions are appropriate to use. As a result, the purpose of this review is to examine the comparative clinical effectiveness of potable water compared to saline or antiseptic agents such as triclosan, chlorhexidine, hexachlorophene, povidone iodine, hydrogen peroxide, or alcohol and to examine the evidence-based guidelines for wound cleansing.

Record details

  • Physical Description: 1 electronic text (14 p.) : tables, digital file.
    remote
    Computer data.
    electronic resource
  • Publisher: [Ottawa, Ont.] : Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, 2012

Content descriptions

General Note:
"07 December 2012".
CatMonthString:january.23
Issued as part of the desLibris documents collection.
Multi-User.
Bibliography, etc. Note: Includes bibliographical references (p. 7).
Type of Computer File or Data Note:
Text (HTML), electronic book.
System Details Note:
Mode of access: Internet.
Terms Governing Use and Reproduction Note:
Access requires VIU IP addresses and is restricted to VIU students, faculty and staff.
Access restricted by subscription.
Issuing Body Note:
Made available online by Canada Commons.
Subject: Multi-User.
Wounds and Injuries -- therapy
Anti-Infective Agents, Local -- therapeutic use
Povidone-iodine
National institute for health and care excellence
Medicine
Medical guideline
Health
Health sciences
Health care
Evidence-based medicine
Clinical trial
Clinical medicine
Wounds and injuries -- Treatment
Wounds and injuries -- Infections
Antiseptics -- Therapeutic use
Genre: Electronic books.

Back To Results
Showing Item 2 of 648

Additional Resources