Randomized Controlled Trial of a Novel Silicone Device for the Packing of Cutaneous Abscesses in the Emergency Department: A Pilot Study.
Derma-Stent
abscess
gauze
packing
silicone device
Journal
Open access emergency medicine : OAEM
ISSN: 1179-1500
Titre abrégé: Open Access Emerg Med
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 101570796
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
14
05
2021
accepted:
06
07
2021
entrez:
5
8
2021
pubmed:
6
8
2021
medline:
6
8
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Traditional treatment of abscesses in the emergency department includes packing with gauze; however, this can add pain and discomfort to the procedure and frequently involves a follow-up visit for packing removal. Alternatives to gauze packing have been proposed, but they may have disadvantages in the context of emergency care. The objective of this pilot study was to investigate the use of a novel silicone packing device - the Derma-Stent. This was a randomized controlled pilot study of 50 patients from two urban emergency departments with uncomplicated superficial abscesses. The primary outcome was the likelihood of self-removal of packing gauze versus the silicone device. Secondary outcome measures included subjective clinician and patient metrics, such as pain and ease of use. Patients identified with simple cutaneous abscesses were randomized to intervention (packing with the novel silicone device, n=25) or standard care (gauze packing, n=25). Mean age was 36 years, 54% were female, and 96% identified as African American. Although it took longer to place, the silicone device (19.0 vs 15.3 minutes, This pilot randomized controlled trial compared the treatment of packing cutaneous abscesses with gauze versus using the silicone device. Limitations in the data prevent discussion on likelihood of self-removal. However, the silicone device was more likely to remain in place at day 3 follow-up and was equally effective to gauze packing in abscess reduction while also improving patient-reported pain scores. It did take longer to place the silicone device; however, physicians reported better ease of use and removal. This pilot study is encouraging for additional larger-scale trials that are required to further assess the utility of this device in the emergency department.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34349568
doi: 10.2147/OAEM.S317713
pii: 317713
pmc: PMC8326928
doi:
Types de publication
Case Reports
Clinical Trial
Langues
eng
Pagination
335-341Informations de copyright
© 2021 Brody et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
AB received research funding and salary support from Mar-Med related to this project. JM is an employee and holds partial ownership of Mar-Med. All other authors report no conflicts of interest.
Références
J Biomed Inform. 2009 Apr;42(2):377-81
pubmed: 18929686
Ann Emerg Med. 2008 Mar;51(3):291-8
pubmed: 18222564
Clin Infect Dis. 2012 Jul;55(1):103-5
pubmed: 22460965
Acad Emerg Med. 2020 Dec;27(12):1229-1240
pubmed: 32770686
S D Med. 2016 Mar;69(3):113-9
pubmed: 27156260
Pediatr Emerg Care. 2012 Jun;28(6):514-7
pubmed: 22653459
J Pediatr Surg. 2010 Jul;45(7):1562-6
pubmed: 20638546
J Pediatr Surg. 2010 Mar;45(3):606-9
pubmed: 20223328
Acad Emerg Med. 2009 May;16(5):470-3
pubmed: 19388915
ANZ J Surg. 2018 Jan;88(1-2):87-90
pubmed: 27621209
N Engl J Med. 2014 Mar 13;370(11):1039-47
pubmed: 24620867
J Emerg Med. 2019 Mar;56(3):298-300
pubmed: 30661820