section name header

Evidence summaries

Topical Antibiotics and Antiseptics for Pressure Ulcers

There is insufficient evidence on the effect of topical antimicrobial treatments on pressure ulcers. Level of evidence: "D"

The quality of evidence is downgraded by study quality, indirectness and imprecise results.

Summary

A Cochrane review [Abstract] 1 included 12 studies with a total of 576 subjects. All assessed topical agents, none looked at systemic antibiotics. The included trials assessed the following antimicrobial agents: povidone iodine, cadexomer iodine, gentian violet, lysozyme, silver dressings, honey, pine resin, polyhexanide, silver sulfadiazine, and nitrofurazone with ethoxy-diaminoacridine. Comparators included a range of other dressings and ointments without antimicrobial properties and alternative antimicrobials.

Six trials reported the primary outcome of wound healing. All except one compared an antiseptic with a non-antimicrobial comparator. There was some moderate and low quality evidence that fewer ulcers may heal in the short term when treated with povidone iodine compared with non-antimicrobial alternatives (protease-modulating dressings (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.98) and hydrogel (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.97)); and no clear difference between povidone iodine and a third non-antimicrobial treatment (hydrocolloid). Pine resin salve may heal more pressure ulcers than hydrocolloid (RR 2.83, 95% CI 1.14 to 7.05). There is no clear difference between cadexomer iodine and standard care, and between honey and a combined antiseptic and antibiotic treatment.

Adverse events were not found in trials. The five trials that reported change in wound size as a continuous outcome did not report any clear evidence favouring any particular antiseptic/anti-microbial treatments. For bacterial resistance, one trial found some evidence of more MRSA eradication in participants with ulcer treated with a polyhexanide dressing compared with a polyhexanide swab (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.13); patients in the dressing group also reported less pain (MD 2.03, 95% CI 2.66 to 1.40). There was no clear evidence of a difference between interventions in infection resolution in three other comparisons.

Clinical comments

Note

Date of latest search:

References

  • Norman G, Dumville JC, Moore ZE et al. Antibiotics and antiseptics for pressure ulcers. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;(4):CD011586. [PubMed]

Primary/Secondary Keywords