***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: Purpose We prospect ively compared two types of dressing ( conventional gauze-based versus absorbing hydrofibre )  after primary total hip ( THA ) or knee ( TKA ) arthroplasties . Methods Eighty c and i date s for THA ( n = 40 ) or TKA ( s = 40 ) were r and omized : gauze-based versus hydrofibre absorbing ( Aquacel ® , ConvaTec ) . The two groups were comparable at baseline . Results There was a statistically significant decrease of dressing changes in the hydrofibre group ( p = 0.0006 ) . Two patients from the conventional group presented minor wound complications . Nurses ’ satisfaction was significantly higher in the hydrofibre group considering the adherence ( p = 0.04 ) and flexibility ( p = 0.03 ) . Patients experienced a higher satisfaction with respect to ease of movement ( p = 0.01 ) in the hydrofibre group . The cosmetic appearance of the scars six weeks after surgery was found to be similar between groups . Conclusions Our findings support an overall improved comfort for the patients and the medical staff by using hydrofibre dressings after primary THA and TKA . The reduction of required dressing changes was observed also OBJECTIVE To compare the performance of Hydrofiber and alginate dressings used in the treatment of primary hip arthroplasty wounds . METHOD Patients were r and omised into one of two groups , receiving either a Hydrofiber or an alginate dressing . Outcome measures , assessed by daily observations , included skin damage ( erythema , blisters and skin injuries ) and the dressing 's ability to h and le exu date s. Photos of the dressing and the skin area around wounds were taken . Patients noted skin problems , discomfort at mobilisation and pain at dressing removal . RESULTS In the alginate group , there were fewer blisters in the wound area compared with the Hydrofiber group ( 7 % versus 18 % , p=0.03 ) . During dressing removal , fewer patients in the alginate group reported pain than patients in the Hydrofiber group ( 2.1 % versus 15 % , p=0.01 ) CONCLUSION We recommend the use of both dressings following total hip arthroplasty , although the alginate would be our first choice , as we found fewer blisters when using alginate dressings as opposed to Hydrofiber dressings . CONFLICT OF INTEREST None Flaws in the design , conduct , analysis , and reporting of r and omised trials can cause the effect of an intervention to be underestimated or overestimated . The Cochrane Collaboration ’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more Background Postoperative wound infection is a preventable risk . One potential postoperative complication is blistering , which leads to increased pain , delayed healing , and higher care costs . The incidence of wound blisters has been reported to be between 6 and 24 % . The aim of this study is to assess whether the risks of postoperative blistering and wound infections within the first 6 days postsurgery will be reduced using a special dressing compared to a st and ard one . Methods / Design This is a r and omized clinical trial in a University hospital . Patients presenting for knee or hip arthroplasty or spine procedures will be assessed against study inclusion and exclusion criteria . After giving written informed consent , patients will be r and omized to participate in the 7-day study during hospitalization . One hundred patients will be r and omized per group . The primary outcome measure is blistering incidence from day 0 to day 6 postsurgery . Photo documentation will be evaluated in a blinded manner by the Clinical Evaluation Committee ( CEC ) . Discussion A new dressing will be compared to the st and ard wound dressing regarding the risk of postoperative blistering , wound infection , and patient comfort . This study will assess the potential advantages of a modern wound dressing . Trial registration Clinical Trials.gov identifier NCT01988818 ( Entered 13 November 2011 ) OBJECTIVE To investigate the effect of three postoperative dressings on  orthopaedic wound healing .  METHOD Three hundred orthopaedic patients were divided into three treatment groups and allocated to management with one of three dressings : Primapore , Tegaderm with pad , and OpSite Post-Op . Staff completed a question naire to evaluate the wound progression . Outcome measures were the presence of infection , blistering and the number of dressing changes required . RESULTS There was a significantly lower incidence of blistering with OpSite Post-Op ( 6 % ) than Tegaderm with pad ( 16 % ) and Primapore ( 24 % ) ( p<0.001 ) . Patients in the OpSite Post-Op group had the lowest exu date levels . CONCLUSION Dressings that employ a clear film and have a high moisture vapour transmission rate have been shown to reduce both the rate of blistering and wound discharge . The additional expense inherent in using such dressings may , in reality , prove cost-effective because of the reduced need for dressings changes and the subsequent earlier discharge of these patients from hospital with an uncomplicated wound BACKGROUND Tape blisters  after hip surgery can be a source of postoperative morbidity and can increase patient discomfort . The purpose of this prospect i ve study was to compare two different types of tape to determine whether the type of tape influences the rate of blister formation . METHODS Ninety-nine patients ( 100 hips ) were enrolled in the study . Patients were r and omized into one of two treatment groups : one treated with a nonstretchable silk tape and one treated with a perforated , stretchable cloth tape . After surgery , the assigned tape was applied over the postoperative dressing with care not to produce skin tension . At the first dressing change , the presence or absence of blisters was recorded as were the number , size , location , and type of any blisters . The presence or absence of tape blisters was recorded at the time of each subsequent dressing change . RESULTS A tape blister developed on twenty-five hips in twenty-five patients . The risk of a blister developing was 41 % ( twenty of forty-nine patients ) when the nonstretchable silk tape was used and 10 % ( five of fifty patients ) when the perforated cloth tape was used ( relative risk = 4.08 , 95 % confidence interval = 1.53 to 10.87 , p = 0.005 ) . We found no association between formation of tape blisters and the age or gender of the patient , number of medical comorbidities , smoking history , results of nutritional assessment , or type of surgery . CONCLUSIONS The prevalence of tape blisters was significantly lower when perforated cloth tape was used than it was when nonstretchable silk tape was used Introduction : Wound blisters are formed in the epidermis adjacent to surgicalincisions and are a significant cause of morbidity following hipsurgery . This study was design ed to compare two commonly used primary dressings , namely a nonadherent absorbable ( NAA ) dressing and paraffintulle gras ( PTG ) . Monitoring for the subsequent development of woundblisters in the epidermis adjacent to the surgical incision wasthen undertaken It was recently reported that use of a perforated , stretchable cloth tape instead of silk tape reduced the incidenc of postoperative blisters around the hip from 41 % to 10 % . The present prospect i ve r and omized study was conducted to determine whether use of spica b and age ( vs the cloth tape ) could further reduce or eliminate the incidence of these blisters .  Patients were r and omized to 2 treatmen groups :  perforated , stretchable cloth tape ( Hypafix ; Smit & Nephew , Memphis , Tenn ) and elastic spica b and age tha was started at the lower thigh and was extended aroun the hip and abdomen . After surgery , cloth tape or spic b and age was applied over the postoperative dressing , with care taken not to produce skin tension . At the first dressing change , presence or absence of blisters was recorded , along with their number , size , location , and type . All subsequent dressing changes were done much as they wer at surgery , using the assigned type of dressing . Presence or absence of blisters was recorded at each subsequent dressing change . Two hundred ninety-four patients ( 300 hips ) were enrolled . Twenty-two ( 7.33 % ) of the 300 hips developed a blister . Risk for developing a blister was 10 % with the cloth tape versus 4.67 % with the elastic spica b and age ( P < .09 ) . Surgery type ( arthroplasty vs open reduction and internal fixation [ ORIF ] , P < .03 ) and surgery duration ( P < .05 ) had more of an effect on postoperative blister formation than dressing type Wound care following lower limb arthroplasty has not been subject to in-depth clinical research , primarily because such wounds usually heal without complication . However , when prosthetic implants are used , serious wound problems can be disastrous ( Whitehouse et al. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2002;23:183 - 9 ; Lindwell OM . Clin Orthop Relat Res 1986;211:91 - 103 ) . We report the results of a prospect i ve , r and omised , controlled trial comparing a hydrofibre ( Aquacel ) and central pad ( Mepore ) dressing in the management of acute wounds following primary total hip or knee arthroplasty left to heal by primary intention .  Dressing performance was measured in 61 patients receiving total hip or knee replacements . There was a significant reduction in the requirement for dressing changes before five postoperative days in the hydrofibre group ( 43 % compared with 77 % in the central pad group ) , and there were fewer blisters amongst patients in the hydrofibre group ( 13 % compared with 26 % in the central pad group ) . We conclude that there is a potential role for hydrofibre dressing in the management of arthroplasty wounds PURPOSE Postoperative wound complications , especially surgical site infections , influence the outcome after total knee arthroplasty . The purpose of our study was to compare four different wound dressings . Following research questions were asked : ( 1 ) Which dressing is associated with least wound complications ? ( 2 ) Which dressing application is the cheapest ? ( 3 ) Which dressing is most comfortable for the patient ? METHODS 111 patients undergoing a total knee arthroplasty were r and omized in 4 groups . Each group received a different dressing with its specific wound management protocol : ( 1 ) Zetuvit ® with Cosmopor E ® , ( 2 ) Zetuvit ® with Opsite Post-Op Visible ® , ( 3 ) Aquacel Surgical ® and ( 4 ) Mepilex Border ® . Follow-up evaluations were performed on the fifth postoperative day and included assessment of the wound , status of the wound dressing and the patient 's own judgment . Cumulative costs were calculated . RESULTS Clinical ly Mepilex Border ® , a silicone dressing , scored the best . No wound complications were seen in this group . The mean number of dressing renewals was 1.9 for the st and ard dressing which was significantly higher ( p<.0001 ) compared to the other dressings . Opsite Post-op Visible ® was the cheapest dressing . Mepilex Border ® had the best scores for pain , freedom of movement and general comfort . CONCLUSIONS Mepilex Border ® is the most skin-friendly dressing . The number of dressing renewals is a defining factor to calculate the costs . Mepilex Border ® appeared to be the best dressing to use after a total knee arthroplasty INTRODUCTION Cutiplast ( absorbent perforated dressing with adhesive border ; Smith & Nephew ) is commonly used following orthopaedic operation , but complications of its use have been reported . A prospect i ve , r and omised , controlled study was performed to compare the efficacy of Cutiplast versus an Aquacel ( hydrofibre dressing ; ConvaTec ) covered with Tegaderm ( vapour-permeable dressing ; 3 M ) . PATIENTS AND METHODS Two-hundred patients were r and omised to receive one of the two dressings following elective and non-elective surgery of the hip and the knee . We were able to study 183 patients . The condition of the wound and any complications such as skin blistering or signs of infection was noted as was the frequency of dressing changes . RESULTS The Aquacel and Tegaderm dressing was 5.8 times more likely to result in a wound with no complications as compared to a Cutiplast dressing ( odds ratio , 5.8 ; 95 % CI 2.8 - 12.5 ; P < 0.00001 ) . CONCLUSION Aquacel covered by Tegaderm is a superior dressing to Cutiplast following surgery to the hip and knee We conducted a r and omized controlled trial to compare efficacy of an occlusive antimicrobial barrier dressing and a st and ard surgical dressing in patients who underwent primary total joint arthroplasty . Two hundred sixty-two patients were r and omized to receive either an occlusive dressing or a st and ard dressing . Wounds were closed in identical fashion . Outcomes included wound complications , dressing changes , and patient satisfaction . With use of occlusive dressing ( vs st and ard dressing ) , wound complications ( including skin blistering ) were significantly ( P = 0.15 ) reduced ; there were significantly ( P < .0001 ) fewer dressing changes ; and patient satisfaction was significantly ( P < .0001 ) higher . Use of occlusive dressings can reduce wound complications and promote wound healing after total joint arthroplasty AIM OF THE STUDY It is important to 
    Output:
    
There was no evidence that any dressing significantly reduced surgical-site infection rates compared with any other dressing .
Conclusion The evidence available in the current literature suggests that advanced dressings such as film and Hydrofibre dressings have fewer wound complications and better fluid h and ling capacity .
However , insufficient evidence is available to determine whether the use of these advanced dressings reduce periprosthetic joint infection