These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Use of a copolymer dressing on superficial and partial-thickness burns in a paediatric population.
    Author: Everett M, Massand S, Davis W, Burkey B, Glat PM.
    Journal: J Wound Care; 2015 Jul; 24(7):S4-8. PubMed ID: 26198721.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: Despite extensive research into the treatment of partial-thickness burns, to date there has not been the emergence of a preeminent modality. This pilot study, the first such study to be performed in a burn unit in the US, was designed to evaluate the efficacy and outcomes of the application of copolymer dressing (Suprathel; PolyMedics Innovations Corporation, Stuttgart, Germany) for both superficial and deeper partial-thickness burns. METHOD: The copolymer dressing was used as a primary wound dressing to treat superficial and deep partial-thickness burns (average 5% total body surface area) in paediatric patients. Burns were debrided within 24 hours, at bedside, in the burn unit or in the operating room. The copolymer dressing was then applied directly to the wound and covered with a non-adherent second layer and an absorptive outer dressing. After discharge, patients were seen every 5-7 days until healed. Parameters evaluated included average hospital length of stay, average number of intravenous doses of narcotics administered, pain score at first follow-up visit, average time to complete re epithelialisation, incidence of burn wound infection, and patient/parent satisfaction on a 4-point scale. We also evaluated our experience with the dressing. Data were evaluated retrospectively under an Investigational Review Board approved protocol. RESULTS: Of the 17 patients assessed the average hospital length of stay was 1.4 days during which the average number of intravenous narcotic doses administered before copolymer dressing application was 1.5 and after was 0.1 doses. At the first follow-up visit, average pain score was 1.2 on a 10-point scale and the average time to re epithelialisation was 9.5 days. There was no incidence of burn wound infection. Patient/parent satisfaction was average of 3.66 on a 4-point scale. The staff had found that the self-adherence and elasticity of the dressing made it easy to apply and stay adherent, especially in areas of difficult contour. There were no readmissions for further debridement or skin grafting. CONCLUSION: Our experience shows that patients may be discharged shortly after the application of the copolymer dressing, with manageable pain scores and ease of use as determined by the caretakers high satisfaction. This new, fully synthetic copolymer dressing is easy to apply, does not require any additional antimicrobial coverage and may be used to successfully manage deeper partial-thickness burns, donor sites or burns in areas of contour, where many other dressings might not be considered or be appropriate. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: None declared.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]