References

Bateman SD. 150 patient experiences with a soft silicone foam dressing. Br J Nurs. 2015; 24:S16-S23 https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2015.24.Sup12.S16

Beeckman D, Van Damme N, Schoonhoven L Interventions for preventing and treating incontinence-associated dermatitis in adults. Cochr Database Syst Rev. 2016; 11:(11) https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011627.pub2

Beeckman D, Verhaeghe S, Defloor T, Schoonhoven L, Vanderwee K. A 3-in-1 perineal care washcloth impregnated with dimethicone 3% versus water and pH neutral soap to prevent and treat incontinence-associated dermatitis: a randomized, controlled clinical trial. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2011; 38:(6)627-634 https://doi.org/10.1097/WON.0b013e31822efe52

Beeckman D. A decade of research on incontinence-associated dermatitis (IAD): evidence, knowledge gaps and next steps. J Tissue Viability. 2017; 26:(1)47-56 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtv.2016.02.004

Berry J, Black P, Smith R, Stuchfield B. Assessing the value of silicone and hydrocolloid products in stoma care. Br J Nurs. 2007; 16:(13)778-788 https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2007.16.13.24243

Black P. The role of accessory products in patients with a stoma. Br J Nurs. 2013; 22:(5)

Bouwstra JA, de Graaff A, Gooris GS Water distribution and related morphology in human stratum corneum at different hydration levels. J Invest Dermatol. 2003; 120:(5)750-758 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1747.2003.12128.x

Burch J. Peristomal skin care and the use of accessories to promote skin health. Br J Nurs. 2011; 20:S4-S10 https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2011.20.Sup3.S4

Chadwick P. Current challenges in wound care. In: Novel technology for advanced wound dressings – first clinical outcomes from an international multi-disciplinary perspective (conference report). Wounds Int. 2018; 9:(3)50-55

Chan KY, Lau CL, Adeeb SM, Somasundaram S, Nasir-Zahari M. A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, prospective clinical trial of silicone gel in prevention of hypertrophic scar development in median sternotomy wound. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005; 116:(4)1013-1020 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000178397.05852.ce

Cronin E. Silicone-based stoma accessories in clinical practice. Br J Nurs. 2016; 25:S28-S34 https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2016.25.5.S28

Dabboue H, Builles N, Frouin É, Scott D, Ramos J, Marti-Mestres G. Assessing the impact of mechanical damage on full-thickness porcine and human skin using an in vitro approach. Biomed Res Int. 2015; 2015 https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/434623

Danial C, Adeduntan R, Gorell EG. An evaluation of treatments for pruritus in epidermolysis bullosa. Pediatr Dermatol. 2015; 32:(5)628-634 https://doi.org/10.1111/pde.12486

David F, Wurtz JL, Breton N A randomised, controlled non-inferiority trial comparing the performance of a soft silicone-coated wound contact layer (Mepitel One) with a lipidocolloid wound contact layer (UrgoTul) in the treatment of acute wounds. Int Wound J. 2018; 15:(1)159-169 https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12853

Denyer J, Pillay E, Clapham J. Best practice guidelines for skin and wound care in epidermolysis bullosa. An international consensus. Wounds Int. 2017; 1-58

Farris MK, Petty M, Hamilton J, Walters SA, Flynn MA. Medical adhesive-related skin injury prevalence among adult acute care patients a single-center observational study. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2015; 42:(6)589-598 https://doi.org/10.1097/WON.0000000000000179

Ferrari F, Bertoni M, Caramella C, Waring MJ. Comparative evaluation of hydrocolloid dressings by means of water uptake and swelling force measurements: I. Int J Pharm. 1994; 112:(1)29-36 https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5173(94)90258-5

Ferrari F, Bertoni M, Bonferoni MC, Rossi S, Caramella C, Waring MJ. Comparative evaluation of hydrocolloid dressings by means of water uptake and swelling force measurements: II. Int J Pharm. 1995; 117:(1)49-55 https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5173(94)00301-K

Gao Y, Wang X, Chen S, Li S, Liu X. Acute skin barrier disruption with repeated tape stripping: an in vivo model for damaged skin barrier. Skin Res Technol. 2013; 19:(2)162-168 https://doi.org/10.1111/srt.12028

Ghomi ER, Khalili S, Khorasani SN Wound dressings: current advances and future directions. Journal of Applied Polymer Science. 2019; 136:(27) https://doi.org/10.1002/app.47738

Gilman TH. Silicone sheet for treatment and prevention of hypertrophic scar: A new proposal for the mechanism of efficacy. Wound Rep Reg. 2003; 11:(3)235-236 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1524-475x.2003.11313.x

Gioia F, Celleno L. The dynamics of trans-epidermal water loss (TEWL) from hydrated skin. Skin Res Technol. 2002; 8:(3)178-186 https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0846.2002.10342.x

Gold MH, McGuire M, Mustoe TA Updated international clinical recommendations on scar management: part 2 – algorithms for scar prevention and treatment. Dermatol Surg. 2014; 40:(8)825-831 https://doi.org/10.1111/dsu.0000000000000050

Gray M, Black JM, Baharestani MM Moisture-associated skin damage: overview and pathophysiology. J Wound Ostomy Cont Nurs. 2011; 38:(3)233-241 https://doi.org/10.1097/WON.0b013e318215f798

Herlufsen P, Olsen AG, Carlsen B Study of peristomal skin disorders in patients with permanent stomas. Br J Nurs. 2006; 15:(16)854-862 https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2006.15.16.21848

Hirshowitz B, Ullmann Y, Har-Shai Y, Vilenski A, Peled IJ. Silicone occlusive sheeting (SOS) in the management of hypertrophic scarring, including the possible mode of action of silicone, by static electricity. European Journal of Plastic Surgery. 1993; 16:(1)5-9

Hoeksema H, De Vos M, Verbelen J Scar management by means of occlusion and hydration: a comparative study of silicones versus a hydrating gel-cream. Burns. 2013; 39:(7)1437-1448 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burns.2013.03.025

Jungersted JM, Høgh JK, Hellgren LI, Jemec GBE, Agner T. Skin barrier response to occlusion of healthy and irritated skin: Differences in trans-epidermal water loss, erythema and stratum corneum lipids. Contact Dermatitis. 2010; 63:(6)313-319 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2010.01773.x

Keeling N. Patient perspectives of silicone technology in stoma care. Br J Nurs. 2015; 24:(5) https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2015.24.Sup5.S20

Klode J, Schöttler L, Stöffels I, Korber A, Schadendorf D, Dissemond J. Investigation of adhesion of modern wound dressings: a comparative analysis of 56 different wound dressings. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2011; 25:(8)933-939 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3083.2010.03886.x

Langemo D, Hanson D, Hunter S, Thompson P, Oh IE. Incontinence and incontinence-associated dermatitis. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2011; 24:(3)124-140 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ASW.0000395037.28398.6c

Lei H-B, Yunjun L, Li X-M Polyurethane modified by silicone: synthesis, microstructure and properties. Beijing Ligong Daxue Xuebao/Transaction of Beijing Institute of Technology. 2011; 31:(10)1242-1251

Lin Y-S, Ting P-S, Hsu K-C. Does the form of dressings matter?: A comparison of the efficacy in the management of postoperative scars between silicone sheets and silicone gel: a randomized controlled trial. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018; 97:(32) https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000011767

Lyon CC. Skin disorders. In: Taylor P (ed). London: Nursing Times Books; 1999

Machado M, Salgado TM, Hadgraft J, Lane ME. The relationship between trans-epidermal water loss and skin permeability. Int J Pharm. 2010; 384:(1-2)73-77 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2009.09.044

Matsui T, Amagai M. Dissecting the formation, structure and barrier function of the stratum corneum. Int Immunol. 2015; 27:(6)269-280 https://doi.org/10.1093/intimm/dxv013

Matsumura H, Imai R, Ahmatjan N Removal of wound dressing and its effects on the strateum corneum of the skin: comparison of eight different adhesive wound dressings. Int Wound J. 2014; 11:(1)50-54 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-481X.2012.01061.x

Soft silicone dressings made easy. 2013. https://www.woundsinternational.com/download/resource/6106 (accessed 19 March 2020)

Meaume S, Le Pillouer-Prost A, Richert B, Roseeuw D, Vadoud J. Management of scars: updated practical guidelines and use of silicones. Eur J Dermatol. 2014; 24:(4)435-443 https://doi.org/10.1684/ejd.2014.2356

Monstrey S, Middlekoop E, Vranckx J Updated scar management practical guidelines: Non-invasive and invasive measures. J Plastic Reconst Aesthet Surg. 2014; 67:(8)1017-1025 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2014.04.011

Niessen FB, Spauwen PH, Robinson PH, Fidler V, Kon M. The use of silicone occlusive sheeting (Sil-K) and silicone occlusive gel (Epiderm) in the prevention of hypertrophic scar formation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1998; 102:(6)1962-1972 https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-199811000-00023

Nikkonen M, Pitkanen J, Al-Qattan M. Problems associated with the use of silicone gel sheeting for hypertrophic scars in the hot climate of Saudi Arabia. Burns. 2001; 27:(5)498-501 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-4179(01)00004-3

O'Brien L, Jones D. Silicone gel sheeting for preventing and treating hypertrophic and keloid scars. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013; (9) https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003826.pub3

Omura Y, Yamabe M, Anazawa S. Peristomal skin disorders in patients with intestinal and urinary ostomies. J Wound, Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2010; 37:(3)289-298 https://doi.org/10.1097/WON.0b013e3181d8c9d3

Owen MJ. Silicone hydrophobicity and oleophilicity. Silicon. 2014; 9:(5)651-655 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12633-014-9188-0

Patton ML, Mullins RF, Smith D, Korentager R. An open, prospective, randomised pilot investigation evaluating pain with the use of a soft silicone wound contact layer vs bridal veil and staples on split thickness skin grafts as a primary dressing. J Burn Care Res. 2013; 34:(6)674-681 https://doi.org/10.1097/BCR.0b013e3182853cd6

Platt AJ, Phipps A, Judkins K. A comparative study of silicone net dressing and paraffin gauze dressing in skin-grafted sites. Burns. 1996; 22:(7)543-545 https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-4179(96)00035-6

Rabello FB, Souza CD, Farina JA. Update on hypertrophic scar treatment. Clinics. 2014; 69:(8)565-573 https://doi.org/10.6061/clinics/2014(08)11

Rudoni C, Dennis H. Accessories or necessities? Exploring consensus on usage of stoma accessories. Br J Nurs. 2009; 18:(18)1106-1112 https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2009.18.18.44551

Richbourg L, Thorpe JM, Rapp CG. Difficulties experienced by the ostomate after hospital discharge. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2007; 34:(1)70-79 https://doi.org/10.1097/00152192-200701000-00011

Salvadalena GD. The incidence of stoma and peristomal complications during the first 3 months after ostomy creation. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2013; 40:(4)400-406 https://doi.org/10.1097/WON.0b013e318295a12b

Suess-Burghart A, Zomer K, Schwanke D. A multicentre clinical evaluation of Cuticell Contact silicone wound contact layer in daily practice. Br J Comm Nurs Suppl Community Wound Care. 2015; Jun:S38-S41 https://doi.org/10.12968/bjcn.2015.20.Sup6.S35

Taylor NA, Machado-Moreira CA. Regional variations in trans-epidermal water loss, eccrine sweat gland density, sweat secretion rates and electrolyte composition in resting and exercising humans. Extrem Physiol Med. 2013; 2 https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-7648-2-4

Van Onselen J. Scars: impact and management, with a focus on topical silicone-based treatments. Br J Nurs. 2018; 27:S36-S40 https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2018.27.Sup12.S36

Wang Z, Zhao LH, Jia ZD, Guan ZC. Water and moisture permeability of high-temperature vulcanized silicone rubber. IEEE Trans Dielect Electric Insul. 2017; 24:(4)2440-2448

Warner RR, Stone KJ, Boissy Y. L. Hydration disrupts human stratum corneum ultrastructure. J Invest Dermatol. 2003; 120:(2)275-284 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1747.2003.12046.x

White M. Using silicone technology to maintain healthy skin in stoma care. Br J Nurs. 2014; 23:(22)1190-1193 https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2014.23.22.1188

Whitehead F, Giampieri S, Graham T, Grocott P. Identifying, managing and preventing skin maceration: a rapid review of the clinical evidence. J Wound Care. 2017; 26:(4)159-165 https://doi.org/0.12968/jowc.2017.26.4.159

Williams J, Gwillam B, Sutherland N Evaluating skin care problems in people with stomas. Br J Nurs. 2010; 19:S6-S15 https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2010.19.Sup7.78569

Woo KY, Beeckman D, Chakravarthy D. Management of moisture-associated skin damage: a scoping review. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2017; 30:(11)494-501 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ASW.0000525627.54569.da

Developments in silicone technology for use in stoma care

26 March 2020
Volume 29 · Issue 6

Abstract

Soft silicone's flexibility, adhesive capacity and non-toxic, non-odourous and hypoallergenic nature have made it an established material for adhesive and protective therapeutic devices. In wound care, silicone is a component of contact layer dressings for superficial wounds and silicone gel sheeting for reducing the risk of scarring, as well as of barriers for incontinence-associated dermatitis. Regarding stoma accessories, silicone is established in barrier films to prevent contact dermatitis, adhesive removers to prevent skin stripping and filler gels to prevent appliance leaks. Until recently, silicone has not been used in stoma appliances flanges, as its hydrophobic nature has not allowed for moisture management to permit trans-epidermal water loss and prevent maceration. Traditional hydrocolloid appliances manage moisture by absorbing water, but this can lead to saturation and moisture-associated skin damage (MASD), as well as increased adhesion and resultant skin tears on removal, known as medical adhesive-related skin injury (MARSI). However, novel silicone compounds have been developed with a distinct evaporation-based mechanism of moisture management. This uses colloidal separation to allow the passage of water vapour at a rate equivalent to normal trans-epidermal water loss. It has been shown to minimise MASD, increase wear time and permit atraumatic removal without the use of adhesive solvents. Trio Healthcare has introduced this technology with a range of silicone-based flange extenders and is working with the University of Bradford Centre for Skin Sciences on prototype silicone-based stoma appliance flanges designed to significantly reduce the incidence of peristomal skin complications, such as MARSI and MASD. It is hoped that this will also increase appliance wear time, reduce costs and improve patient quality of life.

Silicone describes any long-chain inert polymer that contains repeating chains of the element silicon, along with oxygen, carbon and hydrogen. There are a variety of silicone compounds used for various industrial purposes, but this article will focus on the type of soft silicone used in therapeutic medical devices. It charts the development of this technology and reviews the evidence for its efficacy compared with more traditional materials, beginning with silicone's established use in dermatology, wound care and stoma accessories. This is followed by an acknowledgement of the challenges presented by moisture management that have limited silicone's application in flanges for stoma appliances. The article then introduces new silicone compounds that are able to overcome these limitations with a novel method of moisture management, with considerable advantages over traditional hydrocolloid appliances.

Soft silicone polymers have a variety of advantages that make them particularly suitable for use. They are highly flexible, which allows them to conform well to the shapes and contours of the body. They have a tacky quality that allows them to adhere to dry surfaces and a low surface energy that provides instant adhesion. They are non-toxic, non-odorous and have a low allergy potential, as well as being impermeable to bacteria and incapable of being absorbed into the body, all of which makes them comfortable and hygienic to wear (Meuleneire and Rücknagel, 2013; Cronin, 2016).

Register now to continue reading

Thank you for visiting British Journal of Nursing and reading some of our peer-reviewed resources for nurses. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:

What's included

  • Limited access to clinical or professional articles

  • Unlimited access to the latest news, blogs and video content