Patients Prefer Mepilex®1

A recent survey of 600 patients by Mölnlycke Health Care, has shown that they prefer a dressing from the Mepilex range.1

The survey was conducted in the UK between May 2006 and February 2007, involving 600 patients with a mean age of 72 years.  The survey population displayed a variety of wound types, including pressure ulcers, skin tears, venous leg ulcers, arterial leg ulcers, diabetic foot ulcers and burns.  The aim of the survey was to measure the impact of introducing the Mepilex range on the intensity of wound-related pain, compared to a previous regimen of dressings with traditional adhesives*.

Patients were asked to record their level of pain using a visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0 to 10, before, during and after two dressing changes.  At visit 1, their previous traditional adhesive dressing was used.  At visit 2, a dressing from the Mepilex range was used.  

Results1 showed that 93% preferred to continue using dressings from the Mepilex range, with only 4% wanting to continue with their previous dressing.

The results of the survey confirm that Mölnlycke Health Care’s Mepilex range is clinically proven to reduce pain before, during and after dressing change2.

Mepilex is a range of foam dressings with Safetac? technology.  Safetac is a patented soft silicone adhesive technology, which offers all the benefits of self-adhesive
…more…


PR46  
3 September 2007


dressings, with none of the drawbacks.  The Mepilex range can therefore truly be described as ‘atraumatic’, rather than ‘non-adherent’, meaning they will almost never stick to the wound bed, nor cause trauma to the wound’s delicate surrounding skin, which therefore minimizes pain to the patient on dressing removal2,3.  Other dressings with Safetac technology include Mepitel®, Mepiform® and Mepitac®.  

For further information, please contact Mölnlycke Health Care on 0800 7311 876 or email info.uk@molnlycke.com.

-ends-


Notes to Editor:

*”traditional” defined as including using either polyurethane, acrylic, or hydrocolloid-based adhesive.

1.    O’Neill C. Pain Before, During and After Removal of Adhesive Dressings: A Clinical Survey. Ref number. 1028-604/GB. Poster presented at EWMA, Glasgow 2007.
2.    Dykes P. The link between the peel force of adhesive dressings and subjective discomfort in volunteer subjects. Journal of Wound Care 2003,12 (7): 260-262.
3.    White R.  Evidence for atraumatic soft silicone wound dressing use.  Wounds UK 2005; 1 (3): 104-109.

    
Survey conducted by Mölnlycke Health Care (Ref number. 1028-604/GB)
Analysis of data was conducted by Intermetra Business & Market     Research Group, Gothenburg, Sweden.

For further information please contact:

Carol Laing, tel: 01663 735 160, mobile: 07720 895 903, email: carol@indigompr.co.uk

Tracey Halstead, tel: 01663 734 789, mobile: 07876 504 754, email: tracey@indigompr.co.uk

Healthcare Republic does not have an editorial influence or input in to these press releases. The views expressed within these documents are not endorsed by Healthcare Republic or Haymarket Medical Publications Limited.

Enquiries should be directed to any contacts listed within the press releases.

 

Have you registered with us yet?

Register now to enjoy more articles and free email bulletins

Register

Already registered?

Sign in

Before commenting please read our rules for commenting on articles.

If you see a comment you find offensive, you can flag it as inappropriate. In the top right-hand corner of an individual comment, you will see 'flag as inappropriate'. Clicking this prompts us to review the comment. For further information see our rules for commenting on articles.

comments powered by Disqus