This study is designed to compare SANTYL® versus hydrogel (SoloSite®) in the treatment of pressure ulcers for participants in a long-term care facility. After meeting study criteria, participants will be randomly assigned for application of SANTYL® or SoloSite® to their pressure ulcer for up to 6 weeks. A study previously conducted showed that in the long-term care setting, the removal of dead skin (debridement) with SANTYL® resulted in more participants achieving complete debridement, more rapidly than when SoloSite® is used. The goal of the present study is to confirm the results of the earlier study, demonstrating superior debridement outcomes for pressure ulcers of patients in long-term care as compared to ulcers managed with SoloSite®.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
3
Collagenase ointment applied topically
SOLOSITE is a hydrogel wound dressing with preservatives. It can donate moisture to rehydrate non-viable tissue. It absorbs exudate while retaining its structure in the wound.
Unnamed facility
Lee's Summit, Missouri, United States
Proportion of Ulcers With Complete Debridement
For purposes of the primary analysis, the status of complete debridement was to be assessed from photographs by two independent reviewers.
Time frame: 6 weeks
Time in Days to Complete Debridement
For purposes of this secondary analysis, the time (in days) to achieve complete debridement (as defined in the primary analysis) was to be calculated from the date of randomization visit to the date of which the subject's ulcer was deemed to have achieved complete debridement.
Time frame: 6 weeks
Percentage Reduction in Non-viable Tissue
For purposes of this secondary analysis, the assessment of percentage of non-viable necrotic tissue was to be assessed based on photograph review by two independent reviewers, with the reduction calculated as: percentage of non-viable necrotic tissue at Visit 1 - percentage of non-viable necrotic tissue at Visit 7.
Time frame: 6 weeks
Percentage Reduction in Ulcer Area
For purposes of this secondary analysis, the percentage reduction in ulcer area was to be measured during ulcer photograph review by two independent reviewers, using the ImageIQ EDCIQ mobile imaging system, with the reduction calculated as: (\[ulcer area at Visit 1 - ulcer area at Visit 7 / ulcer area at Visit 1\] x 100).
Time frame: 6 weeks
Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing (PUSH) Score
For purposes of this secondary analysis, changes in wound status were to be measured by using the Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing (PUSH) Tool. At Visits 1 and 7, the target ulcer was to be scored based on length/width (from 0 cm\^2 to \>24 cm\^2 on a scale of 1 to 10), exudate amount (from 'none' to 'heavy' on a scale of 0 to 3) , and tissue type ('closed' to 'necrotic tissue' on a scale of 0 to 4); from which a total PUSH score from the sum of scores for the three categories could be derived (ranging from 0 to 17). Higher scores indicated a worse response. The reduction in PUSH individual sub-scores and total PUSH scores were calculated as: (PUSH Score at Visit 1 - Push Score at Visit 7/Exit).
Time frame: 6 weeks
Wound Bed Sore (WBS) Score
For purposes of this secondary analysis, changes in wound status were to be measured by using the Wound Bed Sore (WBS) score. At Visits 1 and 7, eight individual wound bed sore characteristics were scored, each on a scale of 0 to 2 (higher scores represented better outcomes), and then summed to derive the total WBS score (ranging from 0 to 16). The reduction in total WBS scores were calculated as: (Total WBS Score at Visit 1 - Total WBS Score at Visit 7/Exit).
Time frame: 6 weeks
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.