Antimicrobial dressings: Comparison of the ability of a panel of dressings to prevent biofilm formation by key burn wound pathogens

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Standard

Antimicrobial dressings : Comparison of the ability of a panel of dressings to prevent biofilm formation by key burn wound pathogens. / Halstead, Fenella D; Rauf, Maryam; Bamford, Amy; Wearn, Christopher M; Bishop, Jonathan R B; Burt, Rebecca; Fraise, Adam P; Moiemen, Naiem S; Oppenheim, Beryl A; Webber, Mark A.

In: Burns, Vol. 41, No. 8, 12.2015, p. 1683–1694.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harvard

Halstead, FD, Rauf, M, Bamford, A, Wearn, CM, Bishop, JRB, Burt, R, Fraise, AP, Moiemen, NS, Oppenheim, BA & Webber, MA 2015, 'Antimicrobial dressings: Comparison of the ability of a panel of dressings to prevent biofilm formation by key burn wound pathogens', Burns, vol. 41, no. 8, pp. 1683–1694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burns.2015.06.005

APA

Halstead, F. D., Rauf, M., Bamford, A., Wearn, C. M., Bishop, J. R. B., Burt, R., Fraise, A. P., Moiemen, N. S., Oppenheim, B. A., & Webber, M. A. (2015). Antimicrobial dressings: Comparison of the ability of a panel of dressings to prevent biofilm formation by key burn wound pathogens. Burns, 41(8), 1683–1694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burns.2015.06.005

Vancouver

Author

Halstead, Fenella D ; Rauf, Maryam ; Bamford, Amy ; Wearn, Christopher M ; Bishop, Jonathan R B ; Burt, Rebecca ; Fraise, Adam P ; Moiemen, Naiem S ; Oppenheim, Beryl A ; Webber, Mark A. / Antimicrobial dressings : Comparison of the ability of a panel of dressings to prevent biofilm formation by key burn wound pathogens. In: Burns. 2015 ; Vol. 41, No. 8. pp. 1683–1694.

Bibtex

@article{5ee6efda6f094d4aab528429e0be97c1,
title = "Antimicrobial dressings: Comparison of the ability of a panel of dressings to prevent biofilm formation by key burn wound pathogens",
abstract = "Antimicrobial medicated dressings (AMD) are often used to reduce bacterial infection of burns and other wounds. However, there is limited literature regarding comparative efficacies to inform effective clinical decision making.OBJECTIVES: Following on from a previous study where we demonstrated good antibiofilm properties of acetic acid (AA), we assessed and compared the in vitro anti-biofilm activity of a range of AMDs and non-AMDs to AA.METHODS: Laboratory experiments determined the ability of a range of eleven commercial AMD, two nAMD, and AA, to prevent the formation of biofilms of a panel of four isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii.RESULTS: There is a large variation in ability of different dressings to inhibit biofilm formation, seen between dressings that contain the same, and those that contain other antimicrobial agents. The best performing AMD were Mepilex({\textregistered}) Ag and Acticoat. AA consistently prevented biofilm formation.CONCLUSIONS: Large variation exists in the ability of AMD to prevent biofilm formation and colonisation of wounds. A standardised in vitro methodology should be developed for external parties to examine and compare the efficacies of commercially available AMDs, along with robust clinical randomised controlled trials. This is essential for informed clinical decision-making and optimal patient management.",
keywords = "Antimicrobial , Dressings , Burns , Biofilms",
author = "Halstead, {Fenella D} and Maryam Rauf and Amy Bamford and Wearn, {Christopher M} and Bishop, {Jonathan R B} and Rebecca Burt and Fraise, {Adam P} and Moiemen, {Naiem S} and Oppenheim, {Beryl A} and Webber, {Mark A}",
note = "Copyright {\textcopyright} 2015 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved.",
year = "2015",
month = dec,
doi = "10.1016/j.burns.2015.06.005",
language = "English",
volume = "41",
pages = "1683–1694",
journal = "Burns",
issn = "0305-4179",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "8",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Antimicrobial dressings

T2 - Comparison of the ability of a panel of dressings to prevent biofilm formation by key burn wound pathogens

AU - Halstead, Fenella D

AU - Rauf, Maryam

AU - Bamford, Amy

AU - Wearn, Christopher M

AU - Bishop, Jonathan R B

AU - Burt, Rebecca

AU - Fraise, Adam P

AU - Moiemen, Naiem S

AU - Oppenheim, Beryl A

AU - Webber, Mark A

N1 - Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved.

PY - 2015/12

Y1 - 2015/12

N2 - Antimicrobial medicated dressings (AMD) are often used to reduce bacterial infection of burns and other wounds. However, there is limited literature regarding comparative efficacies to inform effective clinical decision making.OBJECTIVES: Following on from a previous study where we demonstrated good antibiofilm properties of acetic acid (AA), we assessed and compared the in vitro anti-biofilm activity of a range of AMDs and non-AMDs to AA.METHODS: Laboratory experiments determined the ability of a range of eleven commercial AMD, two nAMD, and AA, to prevent the formation of biofilms of a panel of four isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii.RESULTS: There is a large variation in ability of different dressings to inhibit biofilm formation, seen between dressings that contain the same, and those that contain other antimicrobial agents. The best performing AMD were Mepilex(®) Ag and Acticoat. AA consistently prevented biofilm formation.CONCLUSIONS: Large variation exists in the ability of AMD to prevent biofilm formation and colonisation of wounds. A standardised in vitro methodology should be developed for external parties to examine and compare the efficacies of commercially available AMDs, along with robust clinical randomised controlled trials. This is essential for informed clinical decision-making and optimal patient management.

AB - Antimicrobial medicated dressings (AMD) are often used to reduce bacterial infection of burns and other wounds. However, there is limited literature regarding comparative efficacies to inform effective clinical decision making.OBJECTIVES: Following on from a previous study where we demonstrated good antibiofilm properties of acetic acid (AA), we assessed and compared the in vitro anti-biofilm activity of a range of AMDs and non-AMDs to AA.METHODS: Laboratory experiments determined the ability of a range of eleven commercial AMD, two nAMD, and AA, to prevent the formation of biofilms of a panel of four isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii.RESULTS: There is a large variation in ability of different dressings to inhibit biofilm formation, seen between dressings that contain the same, and those that contain other antimicrobial agents. The best performing AMD were Mepilex(®) Ag and Acticoat. AA consistently prevented biofilm formation.CONCLUSIONS: Large variation exists in the ability of AMD to prevent biofilm formation and colonisation of wounds. A standardised in vitro methodology should be developed for external parties to examine and compare the efficacies of commercially available AMDs, along with robust clinical randomised controlled trials. This is essential for informed clinical decision-making and optimal patient management.

KW - Antimicrobial

KW - Dressings

KW - Burns

KW - Biofilms

U2 - 10.1016/j.burns.2015.06.005

DO - 10.1016/j.burns.2015.06.005

M3 - Article

C2 - 26188884

VL - 41

SP - 1683

EP - 1694

JO - Burns

JF - Burns

SN - 0305-4179

IS - 8

ER -