ライフサイエンスコーパス: dressing

1 (ADL) limitations (transferring, eating, and dressing).

2 sts, and no evidence supports one particular dressing.

3 incisions received either NPWT or a standard dressing.

4 he photo-oxidation of vegetable oil in salad dressing.

5 mbined action of dipole excitation and field dressing.

6 presentation, cross-presentation, and cross-dressing.

7 erse and depended on type of herring and its dressing.

8 h berberine (Beri) as the DFU-specific wound dressing.

9 activated by a third mechanism, called cross-dressing.

10 cells requires both cross-priming and cross-dressing.

11 ten causes discomfort and leakage from stoma dressing.

12 with and without added a standardised salad dressing.

13 receive prophylactic NPWT or standard gauze dressing.

14 for type of surgery using a large abdominal dressing.

15 f 2700 cP, similar to the viscosity of salad dressing.

16 pply and can be used as any other disposable dressing.

17 n SSI rate when compared with standard gauze dressing.

18 octasulfate dressing and 114 to the control dressing.

19 function, pharmaceutical delivery and wound dressings.

20 opical applications such as wound rinses and dressings.

21 tronics and the emerging area of smart wound dressings.

22 t previously treated with silver-impregnated dressings.

23 orhexidine gluconate-impregnated transparent dressings.

24 ation of chlorhexidine gluconate-impregnated dressings.

25 cies of S. aureus and P. aeruginosa in wound dressings.

26 susceptible to the irritant effects of these dressings.

27 ssed by the use of chlorhexidine-impregnated dressings.

28 illion per day, continually infiltrate wound dressings.

29 al wound care, and alternative antimicrobial dressings.

30 ), Italian (I) and Thousand Island (T) salad dressings.

31 lorhexidine versus standard nonchlorhexidine dressings.

32 ve several advantages over traditional wound dressings.

33 cytotoxic concentrations of silver in these dressings.

34 s antisepsis and silver alginate-impregnated dressings.

35 procedure eliminates bandages, sutures, and dressings.

36 orhexidine rinses, systemic antibiotics, and dressings.

37 tiles to composites, and waveguides to wound dressings.

38 zed studies that compared iNPWT with control dressings.

39 heir sensory acceptance were tested in salad dressings.

40 enting clinical studies with electroceutical dressings.

41 driven use of skin antiseptics and occlusive dressings.

42 gic tissue have performed well as wound care dressings.

43 ich may range from smart filtration to smart dressings.

44 Among 54 RCTs evaluating absorbent wound dressings, 1 found calcium alginate dressings improved h

45 t previously treated with silver-impregnated dressings: (1) the appearance of pseudo-ochronotic fiber

46 in 300 procedures, 2.67%) than non-use of a dressing (14 infections in 753 procedures, 1.86%).

47 s [n = 562]; high consistency), radiant heat dressings (4 studies [n = 160]; moderate consistency), a

48 Current second-degree burn wound dressings absorb wound exudate, reduce bacterial infecti

49 In the salad dressings, all the formulations were able to reduce Z. b

50 to treatment: 126 to the sucrose octasulfate dressing and 114 to the control dressing.

51 are and low-strength evidence for biological dressing and a biological skin equivalent compared with

52 with a bioabsorbable collagen wound-healing dressing and a coronally advanced flap (CAF) to a subepi

53 Toileting, dressing and continence dependency was higher in institu

54 patients assigned to the sucrose octasulfate dressing and four (4%) assigned to the control dressing

55 n between the amount of soybean oil in salad dressing and the absorption of 1) carotenoids, phylloqui

56 Products in the salad dressing and vegetable oils category had the highest mea

57 leg ulcer healing compared with usual care (dressings and bandages without antimicrobials) or an alt

58 s traditionally been managed with 'low tech' dressings and bandages.

59 ) with chlorhexidine versus nonchlorhexidine dressings and catheter colonization rate with highly adh

60 roducts containing emulsions such as sauces, dressings and creams for stabilizing purposes.

61 sensors embedded in care products like wound dressings and diapers to track wound and urinary infecti

62 cal, were also most frequently used in wound dressings and hydrogels.

63 We also evaluate novel hemostatic dressings and their application in the current era.

64 ions on wound physiology, and the effects of dressings and treatments.

65 , high in lettuce, fish, wine, low-fat salad dressing, and coffee and tea.

66 entiate to cytolytic effectors through cross-dressing, and indeed which DC subset would be responsibl

67 Thirty-seven received dry dressings, and 44 received NPWT.

68 commercially available absorbable hemostatic dressings, and are highly biocompatible.

69 beds, protein supplementation, radiant heat dressings, and electrical stimulation.

70 ng glues, bandages, tamponades, tourniquets, dressings, and procoagulant powders.

71 red chlorhexidine dressings, highly adhesive dressings, and standard dressings from May 2010 to July

72 plication, including tissue adhesives, wound dressings, and tissue repair.

73 crobial-impregnated catheters, catheter site dressings, antibiotic lock solutions, anticoagulation, c

74 in vitro experiments demonstrate that cross-dressing APCs do not acquire peptide-MHC complexes in th

75 polymer derivatives for antimicrobial wound-dressing applications.

76 ates for controlled drug release based wound dressing applications.

77 e Biobrane must be removed and a traditional dressing approach should be employed.

78 CTG and rhPDGF-BB + beta-TCP + wound-healing dressing are effective treatment modalities for clinical

79 CD8+ T cells activated by cross-dressing are restricted to the MHC class I genotype of t

80 Insertion site dressings are a major mean to reduce catheter infections

81 Collagen containing wound-care dressings are extensively used.

82 Extracellular matrix-based dressings are subject to rapid degradation by excessive

83 When the dressings are used, patients should be monitored closely

84 dings support the use of sucrose octasulfate dressing as a local treatment for neuroischaemic diabeti

85 Here we describe the use of discarded wound dressings as a novel, cost effective, accessible, and no

86 of wound infection identified standard wound dressings as the only significant predictor of SSI devel

87 nce of wound infections, the total number of dressings at 8 weeks, and the percentage of change in ar

88 f concomitant IADL and ADL, with bathing and dressing being the earliest ADL losses, and finally tota

89 ailure to induce T cell proliferation, cross-dressing by donor DCs contributes to generation of the i

90 We conclude that the process of cross-dressing by donor DCs serves as an efficient alternative

91 An alternative way, referred to as 'cross-dressing', by which an uninfected APC could present anti

92 for the first time that recipient APC cross-dressing can be transiently detected in the circulation

93 Novel applications include a smart wound dressing capable of sensing the temperatures of various

94 36/40 [90%] versus 9/40 [23%]; P<0.001), and dressing change skills (19/20 [95%] versus 0/20; P<0.001

95 h the 3-day chlorhexidine-impregnated sponge dressing change strategy, and $83 with the 7-day standar

96 ge strategy, and $83 with the 7-day standard dressing change strategy.

97 f-care skills (controller, power source, and dressing change), then viewed videos and participated in

98 igned to NPWT (n=77) received treatment with dressing changes every 48 h.

99 r thousand catheter days, and that scheduled dressing changes every 7 days was not inferior to schedu

100 Frequencies of dressing changes were decided by the investigator on the

101 Of the 11,036 dressings changes, 7,347 (67%) were performed before the

102 The sensory acceptance of the dressing containing the nanoemulsions was similar to the

103 each consumed 5 vegetable salads with salad dressings containing 0, 2, 4, 8, or 32 g soybean oil.

104 a-TCP + bioabsorbable collagen wound-healing dressing; contralateral control sites were treated with

105 By contrast, occlusive dressing control wounds showed generalized hypoxia, with

106 hysiological function, compared to occlusive dressing control wounds that showed formation of tortuou

107 ological blood vessels compared to occlusive dressing control wounds.

108 Each dressing cost $9.08 (146 observations) and each chlorhex

109 Dressing cost (especially staff cost) was inversely rela

110 The hydrogel burn dressing covers the wound and acts as a barrier to bacte

111 er, they mediate their effect through "cross-dressing." Cross-dressing, or peptide-MHC (pMHC) transfe

112 In cross-dressing, DC directly acquire MHC class I-peptide comple

113 Highly adhesive dressings decreased dressing detachment but increased sk

114 onstrated that chlorhexidine-gel-impregnated dressings decreased the CRI rate in patients in the ICU

115 Highly adhesive dressings decreased the detachment rate to 64.3% versus

116 -0.868; P = 0.02) than with nonchlorhexidine dressings; decreases were noted in catheter colonization

117 The use of a post-surgical dressing demonstrated a slightly higher rate of infectio

118 dies utilizing a modified collagen gel (MCG) dressing demonstrated improved vascularization of ischem

119 Highly adhesive dressings decreased dressing detachment but increased skin and catheter colo

120 wound therapy, compared with standard wound dressing, did not significantly reduce the risk of surgi

121 essing and four (4%) assigned to the control dressing died, but none of the deaths were related to tr

122 g through the use of tourniquets, hemostatic dressings, direct pressure, or pressure devices; the use

123 sed by more than three-fold after the second dressing disruption and by more than ten-fold if the fin

124 We also compared the rates of dressing disruption and skin colonization.

125 After the fourth day, dressing disruption became more frequent with femoral ca

126 nsertion site and enhanced efforts to reduce dressing disruption in postinsertion bundles of care.

127 Dressing disruption occurred more frequently in patients

128 rmed in order to determine the importance of dressing disruption on the risk for development of cathe

129 Subclavian access protected from dressing disruption.

130 However, the importance of dressing disruptions in the occurrence of major catheter

131 The number of dressing disruptions was related to increased risk for c

132 )2SO4 was introduced pre-sowing and as a top dressing, each dose of 100 kg N ha(-1).

133 However, the strong dressing effect of the pump beam will dramatically affec

134 Such dressing effects are also visually evidenced by the obse

135 ified four-wave mixing (PA-FWM) process with dressing effects in a three-level "double-Lambda" config

136 etraacetate (EDTA)] in a sunflower oil salad dressing emulsion (SOSDE) and shelf life affecting condi

137 Electroceutical wound dressings, especially those involving current flow with

138 ely (refined anticoagulation, improved wound dressings, etc).

139 ibacterial evaluations demonstrated that the dressings exhibited potent antibacterial activity.

140 levels of the atomic ground state, where the dressing field is spatially modulated by inductive effec

141 The TRIM dressing film is composed of alternative microscale arra

142 mechanobiology studies demonstrate the TRIM dressing film with a critical dimension for surface feat

143 xtent to which donor sEVs might induce cross-dressing following liver and kidney transplantation.

144 ated that the prepared mat is a proper wound dressing for DFU management and treatment.

145 issolvable dendritic thioester hydrogel burn dressing for second-degree burn care.

146 Prophylactic use of negative pressure dressings for closed laparotomy wounds significantly red

147 rn patients who had received living pig-skin dressings for up to 8 wk for the presence of PERV as wel

148 hich could be exploited in developing better dressings for wounds and burns.

149 g that riboflavin protected the oil in salad dressing from photo-oxidation.

150 By analyzing 133 discarded wound dressings from 51 patients with the inherited skin-blist

151 ngs, highly adhesive dressings, and standard dressings from May 2010 to July 2011.

152 bricated hierarchical copper- and zinc- buds dressing gamma-AlOOH mesostrands (Cu- and Zn-AMSs) with

153 ted that hierarchical copper- and zinc- buds dressing gamma-AlOOH mesostrands, which are oriented in

154 bility (two or more difficulties in bathing, dressing, going to the toilet, transferring, feeding, an

155 g group and 34 patients (30%) in the control dressing group (18 percentage points difference, 95% CI

156 , 9 in the NPWT group (21%) and 8 in the dry dressing group (22%) required reoperation.

157 ifference in dehiscence between NPWT and dry dressing group (36.4% vs 29.7%; P = 0.54) or mean time t

158 pressure group and 27 (3.4%) in the standard dressing group (difference, 0.36%; 95% CI, -1.46% to 2.1

159 % (50 of 749 patients) of the standard wound dressing group (odds ratio, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.57 to 1.33];

160 dly reduced in the chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing group (random effects relative risk, 0.52; 95%

161 gnificantly reduced in the negative pressure dressing group [6.1 vs 14.7 days, P = 0.019 (2-sided)].

162 patients randomized to the negative pressure dressing group and 25 to the standard dressing group.

163 60 patients (48%) in the sucrose octasulfate dressing group and 34 patients (30%) in the control dres

164 ) patients of 126 in the sucrose octasulfate dressing group and 36 in 32 (28%) patients of 114 in the

165 Overall, 35% of the dry dressing group and 40% of the NPWT group had a wound inf

166 one (1%) patient in the sucrose octasulfate dressing group and two (2%) patients in the control dres

167 6.8% of the NPWT group and 13.5% of the dry dressing group developed wound infection, but this was n

168 ve pressure, 4 days) and 802 in the standard dressing group.

169 g group and two (2%) patients in the control dressing group.

170 ction or dehiscence between the NPWT and dry dressing group.

171 essure dressing group and 25 to the standard dressing group.

172 6 in 32 (28%) patients of 114 in the control dressing group.

173 % [78 of 590 patients] in the standard wound dressing group; odds ratio, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.59 to 1.19];

174 Chlorhexidine gluconate-impregnated dressings have become widely adopted as a means to reduc

175 Neonicotinoid seed dressings have caused concern world-wide.

176 However, these dressings have delivered only soluble EGF, and the nativ

177 t in dermal repair, but EGF-containing wound dressings have not been successful clinically.

178 Biological dressings have several advantages over traditional wound

179 in 12 French ICUs, we compared chlorhexidine dressings, highly adhesive dressings, and standard dress

180 with physician from four functional domains (dressing, hygiene, limb position, and pain).

181 nt wound dressings, 1 found calcium alginate dressings improved healing compared with dextranomer pas

182 Stabilized collagen matrix dressing improves wound macrophage function and epitheli

183 the nanoemulsions was similar to the control dressing in appearance, consistency and colour terms.

184 Despite the importance of thymic DC cross-dressing in negative selection, the factors that regulat

185 This work describes a novel wound dressing in the form of an electrochemical scaffold (e-s

186 ffect of chlorhexidine gluconate-impregnated dressings in critically ill patients has not been descri

187 nds that clinicians use hydrocolloid or foam dressings in patients with pressure ulcers to reduce wou

188 ncer risk were legumes, low mayonnaise-salad dressing intake, and possibly cabbage.

189 ity of hydrogels in soft contact lens, wound dressings, intraocular lens, vitreous substitutes, vitre

190 Cross-dressing is a mechanism of antigen presentation used by

191 We demonstrate that cross-dressing is a robust pathway of antigen presentation fol

192 Thus, cross-dressing is an important pathway of antigen presentation

193 lysis shows that a chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing is beneficial in preventing catheter colonizati

194 ericardial collagen matrix (sPCM) wound care dressing is flexible cross-linked proteolytic enzyme deg

195 PWT, as compared with standard postoperative dressings, is associated with a reduction in the rate of

196 ndogenous antimicrobial defense systems, the dressing itself has properties that minimize biofilm for

197 cy linewidth, measured relative to the Raman dressing laser, that is less than that of single-particl

198 ed the wound with the dextran hydrogel and a dressing layer.

199 on of the chlorhexidine gluconate-containing dressings, local wound care, and alternative antimicrobi

200 s randomly received collagen resorbable plug dressing material (control group).

201 al) or control (bioabsorbable collagen wound dressing material only) group.

202 (Putty P15 and bioabsorbable collagen wound dressing material) or control (bioabsorbable collagen wo

203 wound, aid healing, and an anti-inflammatory dressing material.

204 Thus, cross-dressing may be an important mechanism by which DC prime

205 monstrating that a collagen-based wound-care dressing may influence wound macrophage function and the

206 orhexidine-impregnated and strongly adherent dressings may decrease catheter colonization and CRI rat

207 ncision (n = 816), or receive standard wound dressing (n = 808).

208 rs vs. 34 hrs; p = 0.05) and less protective dressings (n = 2, 9.5% vs. n = 8, 53.3%; p = 0.007).

209 e pressure over the wound, vs standard wound dressing not involving negative pressure (n = 763).

210 2.19; 95% CI, 1.00-4.82], performing a wound dressing [odds ratio, 8.35; 95% CI, 2.07-33.63] and inte

211 The effect of prophylactic negative pressure dressing of closed incisional wounds on SSI rate is unkn

212 We reveal the dressing of doublons by a local reduction-and even sign

213 We reveal optical dressing of electronic bands in a metal by exciting four

214 s rich, including ponderomotive interaction, dressing of the electronic states, creation of coherent

215 l space before closing, and a post-operative dressing of the incisional surgical wound with a sterile

216 This dressing of the trion with soft phonons manifests in an

217 murine models of transplantation, the "cross-dressing" of recipient antigen presenting cells (APCs) w

218 mbrane alloantigen acquisition (mAAQ; "cross-dressing") of host dendritic cells (DCs).

219 onal guides for ultracold atoms through the 'dressing' of hyperfine sublevels of the atomic ground st

220 s (95% CIs) were 0.95 (0.87, 1.04) for salad dressing olive oil and 0.85 (0.74, 0.98) for olive oil a

221 with bilateral incisions randomly received a dressing on one incision and the opposite dressing on th

222 e such as red cabbage with and without salad dressing on the intestinal cellular bioaccessibility (cB

223 a dressing on one incision and the opposite dressing on the other.

224 ucrose octasulfate dressing versus a control dressing on wound closure in patients with neuroischaemi

225 of three neonicotinoid insecticides as seed dressings on bee-attractive crops.

226 any sublethal effects of neonicotinoid seed dressings on Bombus colonies are potentially offset by t

227 the effect of prophylactic negative pressure dressings on postoperative surgical site infection (SSI)

228 ing the use of prophylactic NPWT to standard dressings on primarily closed laparotomy incisions follo

229 linical trial comparing NPWT to standard dry dressings on surgical incisions.

230 ment with either a sucrose octasulfate wound dressing or a control dressing (the same dressing withou

231 ood transfusion; hematoma requiring pressure dressing or change in anticoagulation therapy; or prolon

232 Wounds were treated with placebo dressing or WED twice a week for 56 days.

233 infection, utilizing devices imbedded within dressings or as point-of-care techniques to allow for co

234 their effect through "cross-dressing." Cross-dressing, or peptide-MHC (pMHC) transfer, involves the g

235 cols, involving moisture-retentive occlusive dressing, or standard of care alone.

236 pacity for cross-presentation and for "cross-dressing" other DCs.

237 rts the use of a specific support surface or dressing over other alternatives.

238 .C. (KCI, San Antonio, TX) or a standard dry dressing over their incision at the conclusion of surger

239 ed with a clinically approved collagen wound dressing, peptide-free hydrogel, or blank wound controls

240 versus 71.9% (P < 0.0001) and the number of dressings per catheter to two (one to four) versus three

241 from non-mAAQ, mice reproduced the DC cross-dressing phenomenon in vitro.

242 alternating-pressure surfaces, hydrocolloid dressings, platelet-derived growth factor, and light the

243 eatment of injured skin with a semiocclusive dressing preserves the hydration of the skin and results

244 s covered with a rapidly absorbable collagen dressing (RACD) (Group B) in function of a panel of radi

245 e patients who had NPWT compared to standard dressings; relative risk (RR) 0.56 (95% confidence inter

246 These dressings release antiseptic under occlusion onto the sk

247 However, the mechanism of action of these dressings remain unclear.

248 xchange reaction, allowing for a facile burn dressing removal.

249 An adhesive yet easily removable burn wound dressing represents a breakthrough in second-degree burn

250 ted cell and an uninfected APC, termed cross-dressing, represents an important mechanism of Ag presen

251 Use of a chlorhexidine-impregnated dressing resulted in a reduced prevalence of catheter-re

252 wound therapy, compared with standard wound dressing, resulted in no significant difference in the r

253 atient consultation rooms, laboratories, and dressing rooms, and categorised infection prevention and

254 virgin olive oil in commercial vinaigrettes, dressing salad and in-house reference materials (i-HRM)

255 e compounds and peroxide values of the salad dressing samples simultaneously decreased with the addit

256 College of Surgeons (bathing, transferring, dressing, shopping, and meals), history of falling or ga

257 argyria or treatment with silver-impregnated dressings should be considered before treatment with fra

258 INTERPRETATION: A sucrose octasulfate dressing significantly improved wound closure of neurois

259 y substituting other types of fats and salad dressings (stick margarine, butter, and mayonnaise) with

260 The randomized two-way factorial Dressing Study (1,636 patients, 28,931 catheter days) sh

261 catheter-related infection according to the Dressing Study results.

262 Biological dressings, such as Biobrane, are commonly used for treat

263 rol) or rhPDGF-BB + beta-TCP + wound-healing dressing (test), plus CAF.

264 ng interest in the development of absorbable dressings that can be left in the injury site and degrad

265 developing electronically controllable wound dressings that can deliver drugs with desired temporal p

266 dration status and that the use of occlusive dressings that prevent water loss from wounds decreases

267 ying interactions between ultracold atoms by dressing the bare atomic states with light, creating an

268 rose octasulfate wound dressing or a control dressing (the same dressing without sucrose octasulfate)

269 With chlorhexidine dressings, the major-CRI rate was 67% lower (0.7 per 1,0

270 l are being developed from negative pressure dressing therapies to acellular allograft meshes.

271 Furthermore DC origin influenced cross-dressing; thymic versus splenic DC exhibited an increase

272 ted subspace, obtained by applying microwave dressing to a clock transition of the ground-state elect

273 ect to the wound, and 74% combine a range of dressings to try and manage odour.

274 eater nerve reinnervation, compared with the dressing-treated group.

275 a neutral atomic Bose-Einstein condensate by dressing two atomic spin states with a pair of lasers.

276 By dressing up such lattices with small-world bonds, a nove

277 rapy (n = 785), which involved a specialized dressing used to create negative pressure over the wound

278 ized argyria secondary to silver-impregnated dressings used years earlier.

279 red for female, nonchlorhexidine-impregnated dressings users, and when catheters are left in place mo

280 o assess the effect of a sucrose octasulfate dressing versus a control dressing on wound closure in p

281 sential activities of daily living: bathing, dressing, walking, and transferring.

282 A standardized wound dressing was applied blinding both patients and independ

283 WED dressing was applied within 2 hours of wound infection t

284 DC cross-dressing was cell-contact dependent and unaffected by li

285 ption and by more than ten-fold if the final dressing was disrupted, independently of other risk fact

286 inserted into the pocket, and a periodontal dressing was placed.

287 No other dressing was superior to alternatives.

288 Disruption of catheter dressings was common and was an important risk factor fo

289 The wound healing efficacy of the fabricated dressings was evaluated in streptozotocin-induced diabet

290 acquire viral peptide-MHC complexes by cross-dressing, we show that such presentation can promote the

291 inistration-cleared wireless electroceutical dressing (WED) was tested in an established porcine chro

292 mmune responses induced exclusively by cross-dressing were as strong as those induced exclusively thr

293 Dressings were applied by nursing staff (or by instructe

294 Charcoal and silver based dressings were the most frequently used odour management

295 id not compromise the physical properties of dressing, while improving the biological activities.

296 ractive ground-state potential and adiabatic dressing with an excited state whose potential is engine

297 Functional wound dressing with tailored physicochemical and biological pr

298 Finally, endowing wound dressing with the TRIM effect via in vivo studies in S.

299 Salad dressings with 0, 5, 20, 50 and 100 ppm added riboflavin

300 und dressing or a control dressing (the same dressing without sucrose octasulfate) for 20 weeks.