PTJ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


PHYS THER
Vol. 73, No. 6, June 1993, pp. 355-360

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Rapid Responses are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fitzgerald, G.
Right arrow Articles by Newsome, D
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fitzgerald, G.
Right arrow Articles by Newsome, D

Case Report

Treatment of a large infected thoracic spine wound using high voltage pulsed monophasic current

GK Fitzgerald and D Newsome

Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, Hahnemann University, Philadelphia, PA 19102.

This case report describes the use of electrical stimulation with high voltage pulsed monophasic current for treatment of a large, infected wound of the thoracic spine, following a surgical debridement procedure. The patient was a 21-year-old man with spastic quadriplegic cerebral palsy who was dependent for all self-care and was severely mentally retarded. The initial wound size was as follows: length = 17 cm, top width = 7.5 cm, middle width = 5.5 cm, bottom width = 2 cm, and depth = 5 cm. The wound was infected with Staphylococcus aureus. The initial treatment consisted of 60 minutes of electrical stimulation (20 minutes of negative polarity followed by 40 minutes of positive polarity) once daily. The frequency of treatment was increased to twice daily after 2 weeks. Total treatment duration was 10 weeks. The patient received antibiotic treatment and daily nursing wound care in addition to electrical stimulation treatment. The wound was completely closed after 10 weeks of treatment. The possible role of high voltage pulsed monophasic current in accelerating the wound-healing process is discussed.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
INT J LOW EXTREM WOUNDSHome page
L. C. Kloth
Electrical Stimulation for Wound Healing: A Review of Evidence From In Vitro Studies, Animal Experiments, and Clinical Trials
International Journal of Lower Extremity Wounds, March 1, 2005; 4(1): 23 - 44.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
ptjournalHome page
P. E Houghton, C. B Kincaid, M. Lovell, K. E Campbell, D. H Keast, M G. Woodbury, and K. A Harris
Effect of Electrical Stimulation on Chronic Leg Ulcer Size and Appearance
Physical Therapy, January 1, 2003; 83(1): 17 - 28.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1993 by the American Physical Therapy Association.