Moisture‐Responsive Thermal Conductivity Properties of Hydrofiber Versus Polyurethane Foam: Implications for Pressure Injury Prevention

Effective thermal management at the skin-dressing interface is essential in pressure injury prevention by means of prophylactic dressings. This study quantified the thermal conductivity of AQUACEL Hydrofiber Technology (AHT, hydrofiber) and polyurethane foam dressing materials under normothermic (32°C) and febrile (40°C) conditions across increasing moisture levels. Using a validated custom heat-flow meter system, dry hydrofiber exhibited significantly greater thermal conductivity than the polyurethane foam (0.43 ± 0.01 vs. 0.20 ± 0.01 W/m K at 32°C; p < 0.001). Upon hydration at 32°C, thermal conductivity values increased nonlinearly for both materials but to a much greater extent for the hydrofiber. At 15% moisture, the hydrofiber reached 4.73 ± 0.12 W/m K compared to the polyurethane foam at 1.03 ± 0.02 W/m K. At 40°C, hydrofiber achieved 3.39 ± 0.19 W/m K with only 10% moisture, indicating a temperature-responsive biphasic transformation. Overall, hydrofiber demonstrated a fivefold greater thermal conductivity response to moisture than the polyurethane foam. These findings highlight critical, material-dependent differences in heat dissipation under clinically relevant conditions. The superior moisture-responsive thermal conductivity of hydrofiber highlights its potential to improve heat dissipation at the skin-dressing interface under clinically relevant conditions and thereby mitigate local heat accumulation, contributing to skin protection. Thermal conductivity and thermal adaptability studies should be integrated into dressing efficacy research and be used for selection criteria for pressure injury prevention programs alongside mechanical and absorptive performance.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
International Wound Journal
Published
2026-02-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.70849
Primary Topic
Pressure Ulcer Prevention and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Moisture‐Responsive Thermal Conductivity Properties of Hydrofiber Versus Polyurethane Foam: Implications for Pressure Injury Prevention

Jordan Fisk, A. Gefen, Lauren Elizabeth Bagshaw, Jordyn Bunker
International Wound Journal
Pressure Ulcer Prevention and Management
article

Moisture‐Responsive Thermal Conductivity Properties of Hydrofiber Versus Polyurethane Foam: Implications for Pressure Injury Prevention

Jordan Fisk, A. Gefen, Lauren Elizabeth Bagshaw, Jordyn Bunker
article en

Abstract

Effective thermal management at the skin-dressing interface is essential in pressure injury prevention by means of prophylactic dressings. This study quantified the thermal conductivity of AQUACEL Hydrofiber Technology (AHT, hydrofiber) and polyurethane foam dressing materials under normothermic (32°C) and febrile (40°C) conditions across increasing moisture levels. Using a validated custom heat-flow meter system, dry hydrofiber exhibited significantly greater thermal conductivity than the polyurethane foam (0.43 ± 0.01 vs. 0.20 ± 0.01 W/m K at 32°C; p < 0.001). Upon hydration at 32°C, thermal conductivity values increased nonlinearly for both materials but to a much greater extent for the hydrofiber. At 15% moisture, the hydrofiber reached 4.73 ± 0.12 W/m K compared to the polyurethane foam at 1.03 ± 0.02 W/m K. At 40°C, hydrofiber achieved 3.39 ± 0.19 W/m K with only 10% moisture, indicating a temperature-responsive biphasic transformation. Overall, hydrofiber demonstrated a fivefold greater thermal conductivity response to moisture than the polyurethane foam. These findings highlight critical, material-dependent differences in heat dissipation under clinically relevant conditions. The superior moisture-responsive thermal conductivity of hydrofiber highlights its potential to improve heat dissipation at the skin-dressing interface under clinically relevant conditions and thereby mitigate local heat accumulation, contributing to skin protection. Thermal conductivity and thermal adaptability studies should be integrated into dressing efficacy research and be used for selection criteria for pressure injury prevention programs alongside mechanical and absorptive performance.

International Wound JournalVol. 23(2)
Tel Aviv University (IL), Ghent University (BE), ConvaTec (United Kingdom) (GB), Hasselt University (BE)
ConvaTec
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
Pressure Ulcer Prevention and Management
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.