Abstract
Using a novel, automated robotic phantom system containing multiple wound simulants, we determined the fluid handling performance of the curea P1 multipurpose dressing vs market-leading comparator superabsorbent and foam-based dressings (FBDs). Specifically, we measured the retained, residual, evaporated, and (potentially occurring) spillover fluid shares for high- vs low-viscosity exudate-simulant test fluids, at 12, 24, and 30 hours postapplication of the dressings. These experiments were conducted for off-loaded ('prone'), non-off-loaded ('supine'), and vertical ('side-lying') simulated body positions. We found that the multipurpose dressing exhibited the best and most robust fluid handling performance across all the test configurations, for both the low- and high-viscosity fluids. The FBD consistently showed the poorest performance compared to the other dressings, rendering it unlikely to be able to manage viscous exudates in ambulant patients (such as when applied to venous leg ulcers) as effectively as the other dressings. The superabsorbent dressing performed better than the foam dressing, but its fluid handling metrics were inferior to those of the multipurpose dressing. The current comparative quantification of the shares of retained, residual, evaporated, and spillover fluid, acquired through standardised laboratory tests, should help decision-makers to select dressings that best meet their patient needs.