Authors' recommendations: Three systematic reviews were identified and all concluded that medical sheepskin was more effective than standard care and all mentioned the lack of methodologically rigorous trials. Two guidelines about management of existing pressure ulcers were retrieved with conflicting opinions. One large insurance company indicated that sheepskin would be a covered medical expense if the patient met specific criteria. The second guideline indicated that sheepskin as a standard care was not effective. Additional RCTs are needed before the clinical-effectiveness can be firmly established. Furthermore, without cost information, it is difficult to know whether Australian sheepskins are cost-effective when compared other treatments for prevention of pressure ulcers.The lack of clinical guidelines makes it difficult to determine when and how to use medical sheepskins. The decision to purchase Australian medical sheepskins for the management of existing ulcers cannot be supported with consistent, clear clinical evidence or any economic evidence.

Project Status: Completed

URL for project: http://www.cadth.ca/media/pdf/L0112_Australian_SheepskinUlcers.pdf

Year Published: 2009

English language abstract: An English language summary is available

Publication Type: Not Assigned

Country: Canada

Organisation Name: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health

Contact Address: 600-865 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, ON K1S 5S8 Canada. Tel: +1 613 226 2553; Fax: +1 613 226 5392;

Contact Name: requests@cadth.ca

Contact Email: requests@cadth.ca

Copyright: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH)