{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,1,15]],"date-time":"2026-01-15T03:36:31Z","timestamp":1768448191746,"version":"3.49.0"},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Cambridge University Press (CUP)","issue":"10","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2006,5,19]],"date-time":"2006-05-19T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1147996800000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/terms"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["J. Laryngol. Otol."],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2006,10]]},"abstract":"<jats:p>Introduction: Avoidance of infection at the implant site is a crucial element to the success of bone-anchored hearing aid (BAHA) implantation. However, little evidence exists to suggest the best post-operative wound dressing to use.<\/jats:p><jats:p>Material and methods: We report our experience with 160 consecutive BAHA patients, using four types of post-operative BAHA wound dressing (Tri-adcortyl<jats:sup>\u00ae<\/jats:sup>, Mepitel<jats:sup>\u00ae<\/jats:sup>, Allevyn<jats:sup>\u00ae<\/jats:sup>, and Acticoat 7<jats:sup>\u00ae<\/jats:sup> with Allevyn). Patients were reviewed at week one and week two post-operatively. Infection was defined as a positive wound swab culture or evidence of cellulitis at the BAHA site.<\/jats:p><jats:p>Results: Post-operative BAHA infection rates were 16 per cent, 50 per cent, 10 per cent and 5 per cent, for each of the four dressings respectively, and the mean number of additional visits to wound care clinic were 1.5, 3.7, one and 0.4, respectively.<\/jats:p><jats:p>Discussion: Acticoat 7 with Allevyn produced the lowest infection rate and thus became the dressing of choice for our BAHA programme.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1017\/s0022215106001435","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2006,5,19]],"date-time":"2006-05-19T10:28:31Z","timestamp":1148034511000},"page":"842-844","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":8,"title":["Observational study of bone-anchored hearing aid infection rates using different post-operative dressings"],"prefix":"10.1017","volume":"120","author":[{"given":"J","family":"Doshi","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Y","family":"Karagama","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"D","family":"Buckley","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"I","family":"Johnson","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"56","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2006,5,19]]},"container-title":["The Journal of Laryngology &amp; Otology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/services\/aop-cambridge-core\/content\/view\/S0022215106001435","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2019,5,2]],"date-time":"2019-05-02T19:49:24Z","timestamp":1556826564000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/product\/identifier\/S0022215106001435\/type\/journal_article"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2006,5,19]]},"references-count":0,"journal-issue":{"issue":"10","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2006,10]]}},"alternative-id":["S0022215106001435"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1017\/s0022215106001435","relation":{},"ISSN":["0022-2151","1748-5460"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0022-2151","type":"print"},{"value":"1748-5460","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2006,5,19]]}}}