Effectiveness of a fluid immersion simulation system in the acute post-operative management of pressure ulcers: A prospective, randomised controlled trial.

The fluid immersion simulation system (FIS) has demonstrated good clinical applicability. This is the first study to compare surgical flap closure outcomes of FIS with an air-fluidised bed (AFB), considered as standard of care. The success of closure after 14 days post-op was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints were incidences of complications in the first 2 weeks after surgery and the rate of acceptability of the device. Thirty-eight subjects were in the FIS group while 42 subjects were placed in the AFB group. Flap failure rate was similar between groups (14% vs. 12%; p = 0.84). Complications, notably dehiscence and maceration, were significantly higher in the FIS group (40% vs. 17%; p = 0.0296). The addition of a microclimate regulation device (ClimateCare®) to FIS for the last 43 patients showed a significant decrease in the rate of flap failure (71% vs. 16%; p = 0.001) and incidence of complications (33% vs. 0%; p = 0.011). There was no statistically significant difference between the FIS and air-fluidised bed (AFB) in the rate of acceptability (nurse acceptance: 1.49 vs. 1.72; p = 0.8; patient acceptance: 2.08 vs. 2.06; p = 0.17), which further illustrates the potential implementation of this tool in a patient-care setting. Our results show that the use of ClimateCare® in combination with FIS can be a better alternative to the AFB in surgical closure of pressure ulcers.

A prospective, randomised controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of the fluid immersion simulation system vs an air-fluidised bed system in the acute postoperative management of pressure ulcers: A midpoint study analysis.

The use of pressure-offloading support surfaces is considered the standard of care for pressure ulcers (PUs) by most surgeons. The fluid immersion simulation system (FIS) has shown significant results in previous studies. We compared it, for the first time, with a representative air-fluidised bed (AFB) for outcomes related to post-surgical flap closures. This trial was performed over 25 months, in which 40 subjects between 18 and 85 years of age with ≤2 PUs and history of <3 surgical closures underwent reconstruction by one surgeon. Subjects were randomly assigned to either treatment group for 2 weeks after closure. The primary endpoint was success of closure after the study period. Secondary endpoints included incidence of complications and nursing and patient acceptability of the device. The FIS group included 19 subjects, and the AFB group included 21. Flap failure rate was similar between groups (15% vs 17%; P = .99). The Minor complications rate, particularly dehiscence, was higher in the FIS group (66.7% vs 15%; P = .02). Nurse and patient self-reported acceptability had better mean numeric scores in the FIS compared with AFB (nurse: 1.5 vs 1.9; P = .12; patient: 1.9 vs 2.2; P = .14). Further analysis will be conducted to gain better insight on the FIS as an alternative treatment for PUs.

Diaphragm dysfunction in severe COVID-19 as determined by neuromuscular ultrasound.

Many survivors from severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) suffer from persistent dyspnea and fatigue long after resolution of the active infection. In a cohort of 21 consecutive severe post-COVID-19 survivors admitted to an inpatient rehabilitation hospital, 16 (76%) of them had at least one sonographic abnormality of diaphragm muscle structure or function. This corresponded to a significant reduction in diaphragm muscle contractility as represented by thickening ratio (muscle thickness at maximal inspiration/end-expiration) for the post-COVID-19 compared to non-COVID-19 cohorts. These findings may shed new light on neuromuscular respiratory dysfunction as a contributor to prolonged functional impairments after hospitalization for post-COVID-19.

How 'preventable' are lower extremity amputations? A qualitative study of patient perceptions of precipitating factors.

PURPOSE: Clinicians commonly believe that lower extremity amputations are potentially preventable with coordinated care and motivated patient self-management. We used in-depth interviews with recent amputees to assess how patients viewed their initial amputation risk and causes. METHOD: We interviewed 22 patients at a rehabilitation hospital 2-6 weeks after an incident amputation. We focused on patients' representations of amputation cause and methods of coping with prior foot and leg symptoms. RESULTS: Patients reported unexpected onset and rapid progression of ulceration, infection, progressive vascular disease, foot trauma and complications of comorbid illness as precipitating events. Fateful delays of care were common. Many had long histories of painful prior treatments. A fatalistic approach to self-management, difficulties with access and communication with providers and poor understanding of medical conditions were common themes. Few patients seemed aware of the role of smoking as an amputation risk factor. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients felt out of control and had a poor understanding of the events leading to their initial amputations. Prevention of subsequent amputations will require rehabilitation programs to address low health literacy and psychosocial obstacles to self-management.