Article

Prevention and treatment of incontinence-associated dermatitis: literature review.

Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Belgium.
Journal of Advanced Nursing (Impact Factor: 1.69). 05/2009; 65(6):1141-54. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2009.04986.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This paper is a report of a review conducted to describe the current evidence about the prevention and treatment of incontinence-associated dermatitis and to formulate recommendations for clinical practice and research.
Incontinence-associated dermatitis is a common problem in patients with incontinence. It is a daily challenge for healthcare professionals to maintain a healthy skin in patients with incontinence.
PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, reference lists and conference proceedings were explored up to September 2008.
Publications were included if they reported research on the prevention and treatment of incontinence-associated dermatitis. As little consensus about terminology was found, a very sensitive filter was developed. Study design was not used as a selection criterion due to the explorative character of the review and the scarce literature.
Thirty-six publications, dealing with 25 different studies, were included. The implementation of a structured perineal skin care programme including skin cleansing and the use of a moisturizer is suggested. A skin protectant is recommended for patients considered at risk of incontinence-associated dermatitis development. Perineal skin cleansers are preferable to using water and soap. Skin care is suggested after each incontinence episode, particularly if faeces are present. The quality of methods in the included studies was low.
Incontinence-associated dermatitis can be prevented and healed with timely and appropriate skin cleansing and skin protection. Prevention and treatment should also focus on a proper use of incontinence containment materials. Further research is required to evaluate the efficacy and effectiveness of various interventions.

4 Followers
 · 
479 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Diaper dermatitis leads to approximately 20% of all childhood dermatology visits. There have been several technologic advances in diaper design the last several years; however, due to the unique environment of the diaper area, many children continue to suffer from a variety of dermatologic conditions of this region. Common causes include allergic contact dermatitis, irritant contact dermatitis, infection, and psoriasis. Treatments include allergen avoidance, barrier protection, parent education, and topical therapies.
    Clinics in Dermatology 07/2014; 32(4):477-87. DOI:10.1016/j.clindermatol.2014.02.003 · 1.93 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Context: Topical skin protectants (barrier creams) have the potential to reduce or enhance the severity of dermal lesions following exposure to allergens or irritants. Therefore, it is essential that such products are subject to appropriate clinical evaluation prior to marketing. Consequently, it is important to accurately define a dosing regime in order to assess test products under appropriate conditions. Objective: In this study, we extended the use of a standard rubefacient (methyl nicotinate; MN) assay to establish the optimum thickness and duration of action of a novel barrier cream (RD1433). White petroleum jelly (Vaseline®) was used as a comparator product. Methods: The dermal response to MN was measured on the volar forearm skin of volunteers (n = 12; average age 47.5 years) using an array of biophysical instruments and visual scoring. When applied at a nominal thickness of 0.1 mm, RD1433 retained effectiveness against MN for up to six hours. In contrast, Vaseline® was relatively ineffective. Moreover, RD1433 provoked no measurable signs of irritation and so can be considered acceptable for further clinical evaluation. Conclusion: Future clinical studies using RD1433 should be based on topical application of a 0.1 mm thickness layer every six hours.
    Cutaneous and Ocular Toxicology 01/2015; DOI:10.3109/15569527.2014.994124 · 0.92 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Frequency, persistence and molecular characteristics of multidrug resistant bacteria colonizing inhabitants of long term care facilities are topics of current concern. We performed a point-prevalence survey of 402 residents in 7 elderly care facilities in Berlin, Germany. Inguinal swabs were analyzed for the presence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant Enterococci (VRE), and multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacteria. Three and six months following the initial investigation, all colonized residents were sampled again and the occurrence of intercurrent infections, hospital admissions and use of antimicrobials were registered. Genetic relatedness of the bacteria was investigated using multi-locus sequence typing (MLST), spa-typing and SmaI/XbaI-macrorestriction analysis. 33 (8.2%) residents were skin-colonized with multidrug-resistant bacteria. MRSA were found in 19 (4.7%) and ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae in 16 residents (3.98%). Independent risk factors for colonization with multidrug-resistant bacteria were a high level of care and the presence of chronic wounds. A large proportion of the observed bacteria persisted up to six months and showed a high degree of inter-individual diversity. Outcome analysis revealed that infections tend to occur slightly more often in residents colonized by multiresistant pathogens. We assume that a perceptible population of residents in nursing homes is at risk for individual colonization with multidrug-resistant bacteria as well as healthcare associated infections.
    International Journal of Medical Microbiology 11/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.ijmm.2014.08.006 · 3.42 Impact Factor