The Experts below are selected from a list of 3120 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Anne Hiltner - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
oxidative mechanisms of poly carbonate urethane and poly ether urethane biodegradation in vivo and in vitro correlations
Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A, 2004Co-Authors: Elizabeth M. Christenson, James M. Anderson, Anne HiltnerAbstract:This study used an in vitro environment that simulated the microenvironment at the adherent cell-material interface to reproduce and accelerate the biodegradation of poly(ether urethane) (PEU) and poly(carbonate urethane)(PCU). Polyurethane Films were treated in vitro for 24 days in 20% hydrogen peroxide/0.1 M cobalt chloride solution at 37°C. Characterization with ATR-FTIR and SEM showed soft segment and hard segment degradation consistent with the chemical changes observed after long-term in vivo treatment. Overall, the PCU underwent less degradation and the degraded surface layer was much thinner than PEU. Nevertheless, the results supported a common oxidation mechanism for biodegradation of these polymers. The observed in vitro degradation was inhibited by adding an antioxidant to the Polyurethane Film. Our findings further support the use of the in vitro H 2 O 2 /CoCl 2 system in evaluating the biostability of Polyurethanes under accelerated conditions.
-
Oxidative mechanisms of poly(carbonate urethane) and poly(ether urethane) biodegradation: In vivo and in vitro correlations
Journal of Biomedical Materials Research - Part A, 2004Co-Authors: Elizabeth M. Christenson, James M. Anderson, Anne HiltnerAbstract:This study used an in vitro environment that simulated the microenvironment at the adherent cell-material interface to reproduce and accelerate the biodegradation of poly(ether urethane) (PEU) and poly(carbonate urethane) (PCU). Polyurethane Films were treated in vitro for 24 days in 20% hydrogen peroxide/0.1 M cobalt chloride solution at 37 degrees C. Characterization with ATR-FTIR and SEM showed soft segment and hard segment degradation consistent with the chemical changes observed after long-term in vivo treatment. Overall, the PCU underwent less degradation and the degraded surface layer was much thinner than PEU. Nevertheless, the results supported a common oxidation mechanism for biodegradation of these polymers. The observed in vitro degradation was inhibited by adding an antioxidant to the Polyurethane Film. Our findings further support the use of the in vitro H(2)O(2)/CoCl(2) system in evaluating the biostability of Polyurethanes under accelerated conditions.
Elizabeth M. Christenson - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
oxidative mechanisms of poly carbonate urethane and poly ether urethane biodegradation in vivo and in vitro correlations
Journal of Biomedical Materials Research Part A, 2004Co-Authors: Elizabeth M. Christenson, James M. Anderson, Anne HiltnerAbstract:This study used an in vitro environment that simulated the microenvironment at the adherent cell-material interface to reproduce and accelerate the biodegradation of poly(ether urethane) (PEU) and poly(carbonate urethane)(PCU). Polyurethane Films were treated in vitro for 24 days in 20% hydrogen peroxide/0.1 M cobalt chloride solution at 37°C. Characterization with ATR-FTIR and SEM showed soft segment and hard segment degradation consistent with the chemical changes observed after long-term in vivo treatment. Overall, the PCU underwent less degradation and the degraded surface layer was much thinner than PEU. Nevertheless, the results supported a common oxidation mechanism for biodegradation of these polymers. The observed in vitro degradation was inhibited by adding an antioxidant to the Polyurethane Film. Our findings further support the use of the in vitro H 2 O 2 /CoCl 2 system in evaluating the biostability of Polyurethanes under accelerated conditions.
-
Oxidative mechanisms of poly(carbonate urethane) and poly(ether urethane) biodegradation: In vivo and in vitro correlations
Journal of Biomedical Materials Research - Part A, 2004Co-Authors: Elizabeth M. Christenson, James M. Anderson, Anne HiltnerAbstract:This study used an in vitro environment that simulated the microenvironment at the adherent cell-material interface to reproduce and accelerate the biodegradation of poly(ether urethane) (PEU) and poly(carbonate urethane) (PCU). Polyurethane Films were treated in vitro for 24 days in 20% hydrogen peroxide/0.1 M cobalt chloride solution at 37 degrees C. Characterization with ATR-FTIR and SEM showed soft segment and hard segment degradation consistent with the chemical changes observed after long-term in vivo treatment. Overall, the PCU underwent less degradation and the degraded surface layer was much thinner than PEU. Nevertheless, the results supported a common oxidation mechanism for biodegradation of these polymers. The observed in vitro degradation was inhibited by adding an antioxidant to the Polyurethane Film. Our findings further support the use of the in vitro H(2)O(2)/CoCl(2) system in evaluating the biostability of Polyurethanes under accelerated conditions.
Mildred S Dresselhaus - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
optically active multi walled carbon nanotubes for transparent conductive memory shape Polyurethane Film
Macromolecules, 2010Co-Authors: Yong Chae Jung, Morinobu Endo, Mildred S DresselhausAbstract:We have fabricated electrically conductive, optically transparent, and mechanically strong shape-memory Polyurethane Film by incorporating photochemically surface-modified multiwalled carbon nanotubes (MWNTs). The oxygen functional groups on the sidewall of the MWNTs, created by vacuum ultraviolet light, provide reactive sites to bind strongly with Polyurethane. The homogeneous dispersion of MWNTs is confirmed by the optical signals coming from the innermost tube (ca. 0.9 nm) of the MWNTs, not from isolated single walled carbon nanotubes. The optimally introduced functional groups as well as the judicious selection of organic solvent, both for dispersing MWNTs homogeneously and dissolving the polymer completely, are critical to fabricate high functional Polyurethane Film.
L.m. Ferreira - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Cost comparison of pressure ulcer preventive dressings: hydrocolloid dressing versus transparent Polyurethane Film
Journal of Wound Care, 2016Co-Authors: Rosa A.f. Dutra, G.m. Salomé, L.m.f. Leal, M.g. Alves, A.t. Silva, V.o.s. Pereira, M.j.a. De Brito, J. P. Moura, L.m. FerreiraAbstract:Objective: To evaluate and compare the costs of using a transparent Polyurethane Film (PF) and hydrocolloid dressing (HD) in the prevention of pressure ulcers (PUs). Method: This descriptive, observational, longitudinal, comparative study was conducted in the intensive care units, coronary care unit and medical clinic of a charity hospital in Brazil. Data were collected during a 30-day study period, consisting of physical examination, assessment of risk factors for PU development and application of the Braden scale, which were performed at inclusion in the study and once daily during hospitalisation. Either PF or HD was applied bilaterally in the sacral and trochanteric regions for prevention of PUs in patients at a moderate to high risk of PUs according to the Braden scale, and costs of using PU preventive dressings were estimated. Results: The mean total costs per dressing change per patient when using the HD and PF to prevent PUs were 413.60 BRL and 74.04 BRL, respectively. There were significant betwe...
-
Cost comparison of pressure ulcer preventive dressings: hydrocolloid dressing versus transparent Polyurethane Film
Journal of Wound Care, 2016Co-Authors: Rosa A.f. Dutra, G.m. Salomé, L.m.f. Leal, M.g. Alves, A.t. Silva, V.o.s. Pereira, M.j.a. De Brito, J. P. Moura, L.m. FerreiraAbstract:OBJECTIVE To evaluate and compare the costs of using a transparent Polyurethane Film (PF) and hydrocolloid dressing (HD) in the prevention of pressure ulcers (PUs). METHOD This descriptive, observational, longitudinal, comparative study was conducted in the intensive care units, coronary care unit and medical clinic of a charity hospital in Brazil. Data were collected during a 30-day study period, consisting of physical examination, assessment of risk factors for PU development and application of the Braden scale, which were performed at inclusion in the study and once daily during hospitalisation. Either PF or HD was applied bilaterally in the sacral and trochanteric regions for prevention of PUs in patients at a moderate to high risk of PUs according to the Braden scale, and costs of using PU preventive dressings were estimated. RESULTS The mean total costs per dressing change per patient when using the HD and PF to prevent PUs were 413.60 BRL and 74.04 BRL, respectively. There were significant between-group differences in mean costs for all variables, except for saline solution and nurse-technician services. CONCLUSION Results showed that the mean cost per dressing change per patient was lower when using the transparent PF than when using the HD.
-
Using transparent Polyurethane Film and hydrocolloid dressings to prevent pressure ulcers.
Journal of Wound Care, 2015Co-Authors: Rosa A.f. Dutra, G.m. Salomé, V.o.s. Pereira, M.j.a. De Brito, F.d. Miranda, V.b. Vallim, Juliana Alves, L.m. FerreiraAbstract:Objective: To compare the performance and effectiveness of a hydrocolloid dressing (HD) and a transparent Polyurethane Film (PF) in preventing pressure ulcer (PU) development. Method: The study was conducted in the intensive care unit, coronary care unit and medical clinic of the Holy House of Mercy of Passos, Brazil. Data were collected 48 hours after admission and during hospitalisation. The Braden scale was used for PU risk assessment. Consecutive eligible patients without PUs were randomly assigned by lottery to the two groups, either the HD or PF group. Results: Of the 160 eligible patients, significant between-group differences were found in the mean total number of dressing changes (HD, 6.09 ± 1.655 changes; PF, 5.59 ± 2.036 changes; p=0.010), and mean number of dressing changes in the sacral region (HD, 2.50 ± 0.871; PF, 2.05 ± 0.825; p=0.001), with the PF group requiring significantly fewer changes than the HD group. The most common reasons for changing dressings in both groups were moisture (PF ...
-
Using transparent Polyurethane Film and hydrocolloid dressings to prevent pressure ulcers
Journal of Wound Care, 2015Co-Authors: Rosa A.f. Dutra, G.m. Salomé, V.o.s. Pereira, M.j.a. De Brito, J.r. Alves, F.d. Miranda, V.b. Vallim, L.m. FerreiraAbstract:OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance and effectiveness of a hydrocolloid dressing (HD) and a transparent Polyurethane Film (PF) in preventing pressure ulcer (PU) development.\n\nMETHOD: The study was conducted in the intensive care unit, coronary care unit and medical clinic of the Holy House of Mercy of Passos, Brazil. Data were collected 48 hours after admission and during hospitalisation. The Braden scale was used for PU risk assessment. Consecutive eligible patients without PUs were randomly assigned by lottery to the two groups, either the HD or PF group.\n\nRESULTS: Of the 160 eligible patients, significant between-group differences were found in the mean total number of dressing changes (HD, 6.09 ± 1.655 changes; PF, 5.59 ± 2.036 changes; p=0.010), and mean number of dressing changes in the sacral region (HD, 2.50 ± 0.871; PF, 2.05 ± 0.825; p=0.001), with the PF group requiring significantly fewer changes than the HD group. The most common reasons for changing dressings in both groups were moisture (PF 51.1%; HD 47.9%) and shear (HD 43%; PF 38.9%), with a significant difference in shear between groups. The incidence of PUs was significantly lower (p=0.038) in the PF group (8.7%) compared with that in the HD group (15%).\n\nCONCLUSION: The results suggest that the transparent Polyurethane Film had a better performance and was more effective than the hydrocolloid dressing in preventing PU development.
Jose Verdu Soriano - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
open label clinical trial comparing the clinical and economic effectiveness of using a Polyurethane Film surgical dressing with gauze surgical dressings in the care of post operative surgical wounds
International Wound Journal, 2015Co-Authors: Ana Abejon Arroyo, Pablo Lopez Casanova, Jose Verdu SorianoAbstract:Surgical site infection (SSI) is a common postoperative complication and can cause avoidable morbidity and excessive costs for the health service. Novel dressings, designed specifically for postoperative wounds, can help to reduce the risk of SSI and other complications such as blistering. This study compared the use of a new Polyurethane Film surgical dressing (Opsite Post-Op Visible, Smith & Nephew, Hull, UK) with gauze and tape in the management of postoperative wounds. The results show that the Polyurethane Film dressing results in a significant reduction in SSI (1·4% versus 6·6%, P = 0·006) as well as a reduction in other postoperative wound complications (e.g. blistering and erythema). Economic analysis conducted alongside the study suggests that these improved outcomes can be achieved at a lower treatment cost than gauze and tape dressings. The modest incremental cost of the Polyurethane Film surgical dressing is easily offset by the reduction in the costs related to treating SSI and other wound complications associated with gauze and tape dressings.