clinician talking to a patient

Bring the focus back to wound healing

Get wound healing back on track and patients back to their lives

  • Caring for wounds is both art and science. You provide the dedication and skill to your patients – 3M provides unparalleled solutions developed by empathetic experts who apply science to your healthcare challenges. But in this time of the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare treatments may have been delayed, resulting in the loss of precious healing time. 3M products can help promote wound healing and bring the focus back to wound healing with wound management tools such as negative pressure wound therapy and advanced wound care options that may help reduce the risk of infections, reduce the risk of complications and get patients back to their lives.

Connect with a 3M specialist

Don’t wait. The time is now to help wound care patients recover, safely and confidently.

Now more than ever, patients need reassurance that they don’t have to manage their wounds alone while recovering and healing. Clinicians also need a trusted partner that goes beyond selling products to providing trusted solutions and best-in-class service. 3M gives you the protocols, proven portfolios and expert support that enable you to focus on delivering clinical and economic outcomes. When you’re there for your patients, 3M is here for you, helping to bring certainty in uncertain times. Let us contact you for more support.

Sign up
  • Give patients advantage
    Manage wounds with certainty when it matters most

    COVID-19 has dramatically changed the healthcare landscape for you and your wound care patients. Now, as your patients seek advanced modalities to help them get back to their lives, 3M is here to help.
    As the leader in Negative Pressure Wound Therapy (NPWT), 3M delivers innovative wound care technologies and evidence-based outcomes to suit you and your patient’s needs.

  • Promote patient healing with antimicrobial activity
    Promote wound healing with a powerful portfolio of Advanced Wound Dressings

    You'll need powerful allies to help keep your patient's healing on track during COVID-19. That’s why we offer a comprehensive portfolio of advanced wound care solutions.
    From a Collagen/ORC matrix dressing that can help improve healing rates to antimicrobial dressings17 that can provide an effective barrier to bacterial contamination, and a superabsorber that can help you effectively manage heavily exuding wounds24 even when frequent visits are not possible. 3M gives you the solutions and support your wound care patients need to encourage healing and help them get back to their lives.

  • 4-Step venous leg ulcer solution
    Get patients back on their feet with 3M’s Venous Leg Ulcer (VLU) Solutions

    Venous leg ulcers (VLUs) are the most common type of lower extremity wound, afflicting approximately 1% of the western population during their lifetime.19 With the onset of COVID-19, outpatient clinic visits dropped dramatically and some VLU patients were no longer receiving their weekly assessments and treatment. Delays and interruptions in care can cause wound healing to stall and deteriorate. You can help patients stay on track by focusing on best practices for skin and wound management and incorporating compression therapy as the gold standard of VLU care.

    Today, more than ever, your patients deserve innovative 3M skin protectants, wound care dressings and compression systems to help bring the focus back to wound healing and get them back on their feet.


  • Patient knee with negtive pressure wound therapy
    Reset the wound environment and support wound healing

    V.A.C.® Therapy has been shown to be a successful way to manage wounds for the past 25 years. Extensive and early use of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) can be beneficial in helping prevent wound healing complications and helping to support healing.1

    V.A.C.® Therapy has been associated with:

    • Fewer hospitalizations2,4
    • Fewer complications3,4
    • Fewer amputations5,6
    • Fewer dressing changes for patients with groin infections7,8
    • Shorter hospitalization for patients with DFU’s5,6
    • Reduced treatment times9-11

    But wait, did you know that V.A.C. VERAFLO™ Therapy has been shown to provide better clinical outcomes overall than V.A.C.® Therapy alone when added to standard of care?20

    V.A.C. VERAFLO™ Therapy, when used in conjunction with good clinical practice (e.g., debridement, appropriate antibiotics), has been shown to be more beneficial than V.A.C.® Therapy with respect to:

    • Number of surgical debridement’s during therapy20
    • Time to readiness for final wound closure20
    • Duration of therapy20
    • Number of wounds closed20
    • Number of patients with reduced bacterial bioburden20

nurse observing wound on patient with venus leg ulcer.

Getting your patients back on their feet with 3M’s solution for VLU management

Get back on track with 3M's solution for VLU management


Resources for practice and treatment of wound care patients

Watch and listen to the videos to learn more:


Additional 3M programs

As your facility prepares for a new business as usual, 3M is dedicated to providing you with the information needed to help keep people protected at every touchpoint.

  • Access solutions to help you balance safety and efficiency as patients return for surgical procedures.

  • Learn how 3M can help support the infection prevention challenges you have today, and your facility’s ongoing healthcare-acquired infection initiatives.

  • Find all medical respiratory protection resources in one place, including information about protection options, PPE and skin protection, optimizing your supply and extended use and limited re-use guidance.


  • References

    *Early NPWT was defined for acute wounds as treatment initiated within the first 7 days from the first wound treatment date and within 30 days for chronic wounds; late NPWT initiation occurred after this time. A secondary analysis was conducted on a sub-set of patients where Charlson Co-morbidity Index Scores ≤5, to assess Early vs. Late cost differences by wound type, excluding the sickest patients with significant non-wound long-term care costs; this cohort represented 80% of the wounds.

    1. Banasiewicz T, Becker R, Banasiewicz A, et al. Prevention and therapy of acute and chronic wounds using NPWT devices during the COVID-19 pandemic, recommendation from the NPWT working group. Negative Pressure Wound Therapy Journal. 2020;(7)4-9.
    2. Page JC, Newswander B, Schwenke DC, Hansen M, Ferguson J. Retrospective analysis of negative pressure wound therapy in open foot wounds with significant soft tissue defects. Advances in Skin and Wound Care. 2004;17:354-364.
    3. Falagas ME, Tansarli GS, Kapaskelis A, Vardakas KZ. Impact of vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) therapy on clinical outcomes of patients with sternal wound infections: a meta-analysis of non-randomized studies. PLoS One. 2013 May 31;8(5):e64741.
    4. Scherer LA, Shiver S, Chang M, Meredith JW, Owings JT. The vacuum assisted closure device: a method of securing skin grafts and improving graft survival. Arch Surg. 2002;137:930-934.
    5. Blume PA, Walters J, Payne W, Ayala J, Lantis J. Comparison of negative pressure wound therapy using vacuum-assisted closure with advanced moist wound therapy in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2008;31:631-636.
    6. Armstrong DG, Lavery LA, Diabetic Foot Study Consortium. Negative pressure wound therapy after partial diabetic foot amputation: a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;366:1704-1710.
    7. Monsen C, Acosta S, Mani K, Wann-Hansson C. A randomised study of NPWT closure versus alginate dressings in peri-vascular groin infections: quality of life, pain and cost. J Wound Care. 2015;24:252-260.
    8. Ozturk E, Ozguc H, Yilmazlar T. The use of vacuum assisted closure therapy in the management of Fournier's gangrene. Am J Surg. 2009;197:660-665.
    9. Sinha K, Chauhan VD, Maheshwari R, Chauhan N, Rajan M, Agrawal A. Vacuum assisted closure therapy versus standard wound therapy for open musculoskeletal injuries. Adv Orthop. 2013;2013:245940.
    10. Nord D. Efficacy and cost-efficiency in wound care. The German V.A.C. experience. Journal of Wound Technology. 2008;42-45.
    11. Dalla Paola L, Carone A, Ricci S, Russo A, Ceccacci T, Ninkovic S. Use of vacuum assisted closure therapy in the treatment of diabetic foot wounds. Journal of Diabetic Foot Complications. 2010;2:33-44.
    12. Baharestani MM. Driver VR. Optimizing clinical and cost effectiveness with early intervention of V.A.C.® Therapy. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2008;54(11 Suppl):15
    13. Baharestani MM, Houliston-Otto DB, Barnes S. Early versus late initiation of negative pressure wound therapy: examining the impact home care length of stay. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2008; 54(11 Suppl):48-53.
    14. Driver VR, de Leon JM. Health economic implications for wound care and limb preservation. J Managed Care Med. 2008; 1(11):13-19.
    15. Miller-Mikolajczyk C, MStat RJ. Real world use: comparing early versus late initiation of negative pressure wound therapy on wound surface area reduction in patients at wound care clinics. Poster presented at The Wound Ostomy and Continence Nurses Society Annual Conference, June 22-26, 2013. Seattle, Washington.
    16. Kaplan M, Daly D, Stemkowski S. Early intervention of negative pressure wound therapy using vacuum-assisted closure in trauma patients: impact on hospital length of stay and cost. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2009;3(22):128-132.
    17. Cullen B, Gibson M, Nisbet L. Early adoption of collagen/ORC therapies improves clinical outcomes. Poster presented at: World Union of Wound Healing Societies (WUWHS); 2012; Japan.
    18. 2. Snyder RJ, Cardinal M, Dauphinee DM, Stavosky J. A post-hoc analysis of reduction in diabetic foot ulcer size at 4 weeks as a predictor of healing by 12 weeks. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2010;56(3)44-50.
    19. O'Meara S, Cullum N, Nelson EA, Dumville JC. Compression for venous leg ulcers. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 11. Art. No.: D000265. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000265.pub3.
    20. Gabriel A, Kahn K, Karmy-Jones R. Use of negative pressure wound therapy with automated, volumetric instillation for the treatment of extremity and trunk wounds: clinical outcomes and potential cost-effectiveness. Eplasty. 2014; 14: e41.
    21. Gabriel A, et al, Integrated negative pressure wound therapy system with volumetric automated fluid instillation in wounds at risk for compromised healing. Int Wound J. 2012; 9 Suppl 1:25-31.
    22. Wolvos TA, Negative pressure wound therapy with instillation: the current state of the art, Surgical Technology International. 2014;24:53-62.
    23. Allen, D., LaBarbera, L. A., Bondre, I. L., Lessing, M. C., Rycerz, A. M., Kilpadi, D. V., Collins, B. A., Perkins, J. and McNulty, A. K. (2014), Comparison of tissue damage, cleansing and cross-contamination potential during wound cleansing via two methods: lavage and negative pressure wound therapy with instillation. Int. Wound J. 2012: 11: 198–209.
    24. Jones J, Barraud J. An evaluation of KERRAMAX CARE in the management of moderate to heavily exuding wounds. British Journal of Community Nursing. 2014;19(3).

    NOTE: Specific indications, contraindications, warnings, precautions and safety information exist for these products and therapies. Please consult a clinician and product instructions for use prior to application. This material is intended for healthcare professionals.

    © 2020 3M. All rights reserved. 3M and the other marks shown are marks and/or registered marks. Unauthorized use prohibited. PRA-PM-EU-00415 (10/20)