maggot debridement therapy is maggot literature
Research from ‘Literature Review’ chapter:
Offered the rate of recurrence of pressure ulcers, the strategies used in mitigating these wounds must be effective. Sherman reports that 61 ulcers in 40 patients acquired maggot remedy and 84 ulcers in 70 patients did not get maggot remedy (instead, those wounds received traditional care). The results showed that “eighty percent of maggot-treated wounds were completely debrided” but only 48% of conventionally-treated injuries were “completely debrided” (Sherman, 208).
(Qualitative) Laura Jean van Veen presents a case in the Diary of Twisted, Ostomy and Continence Nursing jobs; a 59-year-old woman (a Jehovah’s Witness) was significantly injured within an auto accident in Vancouver. To save lots of her legs (her religion did not permit blood transfusions) the family members asked for maggot therapy. After applying maggots weekly for 6 several weeks, “the individual [was] now free of infection” and had skin graft surgical treatment (van Veen, 2008, 432).
(Qualitative) One more case study inside the Journal of Wound, Ostomy and Je?ne Nursing relates to an 87-year-old woman who a serious twisted on her leg (with “significant” dead tissue) (Steenvoorde, ou al., 2008). The woman a new history of “cardiac decompensationhypertension and atrial fibrillation” so the treatments used on her had to consider those problems into account. After two weeks of classic treatments, doctors applied MDT (200 maggots), but she lost quite a lot of blood through the maggot app. The blood loss eventually halted and doctors believed that perhaps too many maggots was used, which could explain the bleeding. The salient a significant this paper is that “serious bleeding can easily occur” with MDT, in particular if too many maggots are engaged in the treatment.
(Qualitative) Is the “free-range” putting on maggot debridement more effective than “contained” maggot debridement? Totally free range means the maggots are put “freely” inside the wound after which a “cage” is put around the twisted preventing the maggots from escaping. “Contained” maggot technique is if the maggots are place in a bag and allowed to consume the rotting tissue. The authors deduce that while sufferers prefer the “containment” process (because the maggots are not visible), doctors choose to free-range strategy because it is “essential for medical center hygiene” mainly because maggots can’t escape while easily (Steenvoorde, 2005). The results obtained after sixty four patients with 69 “chronic wounds” (that had both gangrenous or necrotic tissues) were examined in palpitante, the author concludes that “significantly better outcomes were attained with the free-range technique” (Steenvoorde, 430).
Works Cited
Courtenay, M., Churdh, J. D. T., and Ryan, To. J. (2000). Larva therapy in wound management.
Diary of the Hoheitsvoll Society of drugs, Vol. 93, 72-74.
Fenn-Smith, P. (2008). Case Study: Maggot Debridement Therapy. Wound Practice and Research, 16(4), 169-170.
Paul, Aaron G., Ahmad, Nazi Watts., Lee, H. L., Ariff, Ashraff M., Saranum, Masri, Naicker
Amara S., and Osman, Zulkiflee. (2009). Maggot debridement remedy with Lucilia cuprina: a Comparison with regular debridement in diabetic foot ulcers. International Wound
Log, 6(1), 39-45.
Sherman, Ronald a. (2002). Maggot or conservative debridement therapy to get the treatment of pressure ulcers. Twisted Repair and Regeneration, 10(4), 208-213.
Sherman, Ronald a. (2003). Maggot Therapy for Treating Diabetic Foot Ulcers Unresponsive to Conventional Remedy. Diabetes Proper care, 26(2), 446-450.
Sherman, Ronald a., Shapiro, Charles Electronic., and Yang, Ronald Meters. (2007). Maggot Therapy pertaining to Problematic Injuries: Uncommon and
