Volume 18, Issue 3 (2026)
Iran J War Public Health 2026, 18(3): 1001-1012 |
Back to browse issues page
Article Type:
Subject:
History
Received: 2026/08/1 | Accepted: 2026/09/8 | Published: 2026/09/9
Received: 2026/08/1 | Accepted: 2026/09/8 | Published: 2026/09/9
Rights and permissions
Nurses' Perspectives on the Quality of Alginate and Hydrocolloid Wound Dressing: A Comparative Study
Abstract (331 Views)
Background: Advanced wound dressings are now a mainstay of modern wound management, serving to promote healing, manage exudate and improve patient comfort. Alginate and hydrocolloid dressings are two of the most common advanced dressings used in clinical practice. Although numerous studies have evaluated their clinical effectiveness and wound healing outcomes, limited attention has been directed toward nurses' perspectives regarding their quality and performance in routine wound care. Objectives: This study aimed to compare nurses' perspectives concerning the quality of alginate and hydrocolloid wound dressings.
Methods: A descriptive comparative cross-sectional study was conducted among 120 nurses working in medical, surgical, burn, and critical care units in selected hospitals in Baghdad, Iraq. A non-probability purposive sampling technique was used to recruit participants. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire consisting of demographic characteristics and quality assessment criteria for alginate and hydrocolloid wound dressings. The instrument demonstrated good reliability (Cronbach's Alpha = 0.80). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and a paired-samples t-test.
Results: Both alginate and hydrocolloid dressings achieved high overall quality ratings from nurses. However, a statistically significant difference was observed between the two dressing types in favor of hydrocolloid dressings (t = -4.979, p < 0.001). Alginate dressings received higher ratings for atraumatic removal, exudate absorption, wound hemostasis, and filling of dead space. In contrast, hydrocolloid dressings were rated more favorably regarding comfort, dressing integrity, residue-free removal, and autolytic debridement. Both dressing types demonstrated similarly high ratings for hypoallergenic properties.
Conclusion: The results showed that both types of dressings were perceived as high quality wound care products and received positive ratings on a number of quality areas. However, there was a considerable difference between the two types of dressings, with hydrocolloid dressings being rated higher by nurses in overall evaluation.
Methods: A descriptive comparative cross-sectional study was conducted among 120 nurses working in medical, surgical, burn, and critical care units in selected hospitals in Baghdad, Iraq. A non-probability purposive sampling technique was used to recruit participants. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire consisting of demographic characteristics and quality assessment criteria for alginate and hydrocolloid wound dressings. The instrument demonstrated good reliability (Cronbach's Alpha = 0.80). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and a paired-samples t-test.
Results: Both alginate and hydrocolloid dressings achieved high overall quality ratings from nurses. However, a statistically significant difference was observed between the two dressing types in favor of hydrocolloid dressings (t = -4.979, p < 0.001). Alginate dressings received higher ratings for atraumatic removal, exudate absorption, wound hemostasis, and filling of dead space. In contrast, hydrocolloid dressings were rated more favorably regarding comfort, dressing integrity, residue-free removal, and autolytic debridement. Both dressing types demonstrated similarly high ratings for hypoallergenic properties.
Conclusion: The results showed that both types of dressings were perceived as high quality wound care products and received positive ratings on a number of quality areas. However, there was a considerable difference between the two types of dressings, with hydrocolloid dressings being rated higher by nurses in overall evaluation.