Efficacy, tolerability and XXXX benefit of ultrasound-assisted wound treatment versus surgical debridement: a randomized clinical study.

@entity1 @entity158 @entity130
BACKGROUND: Low-frequency ultrasound has been shown to be an alternative to surgical @entity130 ( @entity130 ) to stimulate wound healing; however, few data are available. OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy, tolerability and benefit of both wound treatment methods. METHODS: A monocentric prospective randomized-controlled clinical study assessing @entity1 -reported outcomes and clinical efficacy of ultrasound-assisted wound treatment (UAW) compared to @entity130 . RESULTS: In total, 67 @entity1 were treated. Efficacy and tolerability were found to be good for both treatments, with 88% of UAW and 85.2% of @entity130 @entity1 experiencing more-than-minimal @entity1 benefit. Quality of life improved significantly. Wound status improved and @entity158 decreased in both groups. CONCLUSION: Compared to the gold standard (i.e. @entity130 ), UAW displays the same high efficacy, comparable @entity1 benefit and improved quality of life. Both procedures are equally suitable for highly beneficial guideline-based treatment of chronic wounds.
