Wet-to-dry vs Petrolatum & Non-stick Dressings After Hidradenitis Suppurativa Surgery
Comparison of Wet-to-dry vs Petrolatum and Non-stick Dressing for Second Intention Healing Following Hidradenitis Suppurativa Surgery
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
Study Contact
- Name: Christopher J Sayed, MD
- Phone Number: (984) 974-3900
- Email: christopher_sayed@med.unc.edu
Study Contact Backup
- Name: Franklin R Blum, BS
- Phone Number: (984) 974-3900
- Email: franklin_blum@med.unc.edu
Study Locations
-
-
North Carolina
-
Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States, 27599
- UNC School of Medicine Department of Dermatology
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Male & females > or = 16 years of age
- Patient must have undergone a standard-of-care surgical procedure for HS with planned secondary intention healing of the wound.
- Must be able to provide adequate informed consent for themselves
- Patient must be capable of performing either of the recommended wound care regimens on their own or have someone available to consistently assist with wound care.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Patients with surgically closed wounds (sutures, staples)
- Patients with preference for specific types of bandaging protocols
- Patients that have not been able to tolerate either wet-to-dry or petrolatum and non-stick bandages in the past
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Supportive Care
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Triple
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Active Comparator: Wet-to-dry Dressings
Participants in this arm will receive standard of care wet-to-dry dressings.
|
This dressing technique involves moistening a piece of gauze with normal saline or other cleansing solution, placing the moistened gauze on the wound, allowing the gauze to dry, and then removing and replacing the bandage regularly over a period of days to weeks
|
|
Experimental: Petrolatum with Non-Stick Gauze
Participants in this arm will receive petrolatum with non-stick gauze.
|
This dressing approach involves applying a thick layer of petrolatum to the wound once or twice daily to maintain a moist wound base.
After placement of petrolatum, the wound is covered with nonadherent gauze and tape or another bordered dressing.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Wound QOL Survey Score Over Time
Time Frame: Administered at 1, 2, 4 and 6 weeks post-surgery
|
A validated Wound Quality of Life (QOL) Survey will be administered that focuses on patient-reported outcomes of level of wound pain, pain with dressing changes (application and removal), satisfaction with the bandaging, and ease of application of the bandaging, all 17 elements on a 0-4 scale.
A mean score is calculated using each component such that a total score ranges from 0 to 4 with higher scores indicating a worse outcome.
|
Administered at 1, 2, 4 and 6 weeks post-surgery
|
|
PUSH Score Over Time
Time Frame: Completed at 1, 2, 4 and 6 weeks post-surgery utilizing images submitted by patients
|
The pressure ulcer scale for healing (PUSH) tool is a validated means of measuring wound healing over time, specifically wounds that heal via secondary intent, by taking into account things like wound size and wound exudate, among others.
Scores range from 0-17 with higher scores indicating inferior wound healing.
|
Completed at 1, 2, 4 and 6 weeks post-surgery utilizing images submitted by patients
|
|
Pain With Dressing Changes Over Time
Time Frame: Collected at 1, 2, 4 and 6 weeks post-surgery
|
The numeric rating scale (NRS) will be used, where patients will be asked to rate pain with dressing changes and general pain on a scale from 0-10 with higher scores indicating worse pain.
This information will be collected in the patient survey that is sent post-operatively.
|
Collected at 1, 2, 4 and 6 weeks post-surgery
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Collaborators
Collaborators
Investigators
Investigators
- Study Director: Christopher J Sayed, MD, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
- Principal Investigator: Franklin R Blum, BS, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Augustin M, Conde Montero E, Zander N, Baade K, Herberger K, Debus ES, Diener H, Neubert T, Blome C. Validity and feasibility of the wound-QoL questionnaire on health-related quality of life in chronic wounds. Wound Repair Regen. 2017 Sep;25(5):852-857. doi: 10.1111/wrr.12583. Epub 2017 Nov 2.
- Stotts NA, Rodeheaver GT, Thomas DR, Frantz RA, Bartolucci AA, Sussman C, Ferrell BA, Cuddigan J, Maklebust J. An instrument to measure healing in pressure ulcers: development and validation of the pressure ulcer scale for healing (PUSH). J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2001 Dec;56(12):M795-9. doi: 10.1093/gerona/56.12.m795.
- van der Zee HH, Jemec GB. New insights into the diagnosis of hidradenitis suppurativa: Clinical presentations and phenotypes. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2015 Nov;73(5 Suppl 1):S23-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2015.07.047.
- von der Werth JM, Williams HC. The natural history of hidradenitis suppurativa. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2000 Sep;14(5):389-92. doi: 10.1046/j.1468-3083.2000.00087.x.
- Ring HC, Theut Riis P, Miller IM, Saunte DM, Jemec GB. Self-reported pain management in hidradenitis suppurativa. Br J Dermatol. 2016 Apr;174(4):909-11. doi: 10.1111/bjd.14266. Epub 2016 Jan 6. No abstract available.
- Ingram JR, Jenkins-Jones S, Knipe DW, Morgan CLI, Cannings-John R, Piguet V. Population-based Clinical Practice Research Datalink study using algorithm modelling to identify the true burden of hidradenitis suppurativa. Br J Dermatol. 2018 Apr;178(4):917-924. doi: 10.1111/bjd.16101. Epub 2018 Feb 22.
- Thompson N, Gordey L, Bowles H, Parslow N, Houghton P. Reliability and validity of the revised photographic wound assessment tool on digital images taken of various types of chronic wounds. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2013 Aug;26(8):360-73. doi: 10.1097/01.ASW.0000431329.50869.6f.
- Eaglstein WH, Davis SC, Mehle AL, Mertz PM. Optimal use of an occlusive dressing to enhance healing. Effect of delayed application and early removal on wound healing. Arch Dermatol. 1988 Mar;124(3):392-5.
Helpful Links
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- 21-1989
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
IPD Plan Description
IPD Sharing Time Frame
IPD Sharing Access Criteria
IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type
- STUDY_PROTOCOL
- ICF
- ANALYTIC_CODE
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Surgical Wound
-
NCT03716687TerminatedSurgical Wound | Surgical Site Infection | Wound Dehiscence, Surgical | Dehiscence of Internal Surgical Wound
-
NCT05716490Active, not recruitingSurgical Wound | Surgical Wound Infection | Surgical Site Infection | Surgical Wound, Healed | Surgical Complication | Surgical Wound Dehiscence | Surgical Wound Haemorrhage
-
NCT05805046WithdrawnSurgical Wound, Recent | Trauma-related Wound | Dehiscence Wound | Surgical Wound Leak
-
NCT04894604Not yet recruitingSurgical Wound | Surgical Incision | Surgical Wound Dehiscence | Incision, Surgical | Surgical Wound, Recent
-
NCT07459855Recruiting
-
NCT02500875Unknown
-
NCT04038671WithdrawnSurgical Wound, Healed
-
NCT06371430CompletedWounds and Injuries | Wound Surgical | Wound Healing Disorder
-
NCT03303027CompletedSurgical Wound Cosmesis
-
NCT05166681CompletedSurgical Wound Closure Technique
Clinical Trials on Wet-to-Dry Dressings
-
NCT02519192Withdrawn
-
NCT00686296Completed
-
NCT04238182Unknown
-
NCT05549856Not yet recruitingSolid Pancreatic Lesions | EUS-FNB
-
NCT00121537TerminatedCompartment Syndromes | Wounds
-
NCT07307391CompletedHeat Acclimation and Thermotolerance | Heat Effect
-
NCT03164746Completed
-
NCT07595484CompletedTympanic Membrane Perforation | Chronic Otitis Media