Self-Adhesive versus Cohesive Bandages: A comparative review of material performance, skin compatibility, and clinical utility in wound care

Bandages are a crucial part of clinical and sports medicine and serve the purpose of wound management, providing compression, and supporting the musculoskeletal structure. Self-adhesive and cohesive bandages are commonly used, but they differ in their adhesion mechanisms and their clinical applications. Adhesive bandages stick directly on the skin, thus ensuring secure fixation for dressing of wounds, while cohesive bandages stick only to each other. So, they provide stable compression and support to the joints without coming into direct contact with the skin. This review presents a systematic comparison of these two types of bandages based on the published literature, technical specifications, and clinical observations, with a focus on adhesion, skin tolerance, ease of application, durability under perspiration, and functional performance. The quantitative data reveal that self-adhesive bandages can have a loss of adhesion of up to 30-40% due to very humid conditions or sweating and in some cases may lead to mild-to-moderate skin irritation, especially in sensitive patients. On the other hand, cohesive bandages not only hold their grip and compression but also are painless when removed and need proper wrapping to ensure the right pressure is applied throughout. The discussion is around the advantages, disadvantages, and best-use scenarios which are critically appraised, and a clinical decision framework is proposed for choosing bandages with regard to skin sensitivity, activity level, and therapeutic goals. The gaps that have been identified include a lack of standardized testing, variability in outcomes over the long term, and the unexploited potential of advanced materials such as hypoallergenic adhesives, textile composites, and smart fabrics. The review points out that the proper bandage selection weighs the factors of clinical effectiveness, patient comfort, and environmental conditions. The use of new materials and better application methods may further improve performance and safety, thus leading to better results not only in healthcare but also in sports.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2025-12-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17875770
Primary Topic
Wound Healing and Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Self-Adhesive versus Cohesive Bandages: A comparative review of material performance, skin compatibility, and clinical utility in wound care

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Wound Healing and Treatments
article

Self-Adhesive versus Cohesive Bandages: A comparative review of material performance, skin compatibility, and clinical utility in wound care

article en

Abstract

Bandages are a crucial part of clinical and sports medicine and serve the purpose of wound management, providing compression, and supporting the musculoskeletal structure. Self-adhesive and cohesive bandages are commonly used, but they differ in their adhesion mechanisms and their clinical applications. Adhesive bandages stick directly on the skin, thus ensuring secure fixation for dressing of wounds, while cohesive bandages stick only to each other. So, they provide stable compression and support to the joints without coming into direct contact with the skin. This review presents a systematic comparison of these two types of bandages based on the published literature, technical specifications, and clinical observations, with a focus on adhesion, skin tolerance, ease of application, durability under perspiration, and functional performance. The quantitative data reveal that self-adhesive bandages can have a loss of adhesion of up to 30-40% due to very humid conditions or sweating and in some cases may lead to mild-to-moderate skin irritation, especially in sensitive patients. On the other hand, cohesive bandages not only hold their grip and compression but also are painless when removed and need proper wrapping to ensure the right pressure is applied throughout. The discussion is around the advantages, disadvantages, and best-use scenarios which are critically appraised, and a clinical decision framework is proposed for choosing bandages with regard to skin sensitivity, activity level, and therapeutic goals. The gaps that have been identified include a lack of standardized testing, variability in outcomes over the long term, and the unexploited potential of advanced materials such as hypoallergenic adhesives, textile composites, and smart fabrics. The review points out that the proper bandage selection weighs the factors of clinical effectiveness, patient comfort, and environmental conditions. The use of new materials and better application methods may further improve performance and safety, thus leading to better results not only in healthcare but also in sports.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Meril Life Sciences (India) (IN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 35%
Wound Healing and Treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Self-Adhesive versus Cohesive Bandages: A comparative review of material performance, skin compatibility, and clinical utility in wound care · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS