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: The use of modern dressings in managing split-thickness skin graft donor sites: a single-centre randomised controlled trial.
    Author: Kazanavičius M, Cepas A, Kolaityte V, Simoliuniene R, Rimdeika R.
    Journal: J Wound Care; 2017 Jun 02; 26(6):281-291. PubMed ID: 28598760.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To identify the most appropriate, most suitable and most efficient dressing for split-thickness skin graft (STSG) donor sites. Comparing the wound healing rate, pain severity and duration, as well as the dressing change frequency in four randomised patient groups. METHODS: A single-centre non-blinded randomised controlled trial was carried out during 2010-2014. All patients treated for skin defects/lesions (due to burns, trauma or ulcers) using STSG were included in the study. All patients were randomly allocated in four different donor site treatment groups; polyurethane (PU group, Mepilex); polyurethane with silicone membrane (PUSM group; Mepilex border,); transparent, breathable film (TBF group; Mepitel film) and cotton gauze dressings (CG group) using Excel 2007. We evaluated: wound healing time, pain severity and duration, the frequency of dressing change, donor site re-epithelialisation, donor site complications (signs of inflammation or infection). Patients were assessed on postoperative days: 1, 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18 and 21. RESULTS: After random allocation of study participants the number of patients in each group were: PU group n=25; PUSM group n=24; TBF group n=24; CG group n=25. The groups were homogenous according to gender, age, main pathology, donor site area and wound size. The STSG donor site healing time varied from 9 to 21 days. The mean healing time in the CG group was 14.76 days, whereas in the PU, PUSM, and TBF group it was significantly shorter; 12.25 days, 11.63 days and 10 days, respectively. Patients in the TBF group demonstrated the most rapid healing time with 66.7% of STSG donor sites healed by postoperative day 9. The pain duration interval in modern dressing groups (PU, PUSM and TBF groups) was 0-9 days, whereas it was 6-18 day in the CS group. Pain intensity mean on postoperative day 1 was 2.21 in the PU group; 1.67 in the PUSM group; 1.46 in the TBF group and 3.04 in the CG group. The average pain duration in Group PU, PUSM, and TBF was 4.08 days; 2.5 days; 2.29 days, respectively. The average number of times each dressing was changed in each group was, 2.83 times in the PU group and PUSM group and 1.46 times in the TBF group. The CG dressing group were changed once when the donor site wound re-epithelialised. There was one patient in the PU group who experienced signs of infection, was treated accordingly and excluded from the study. CONCLUSION: The fastest healing time was demonstrated by patients in the TBF group. The pain was not as severe and for a shorter period of time in modern dressing study groups. However, the pain was lightest and felt shortest in TBF dressing group. The modern dressings PU and PUSM had to be changed more frequently than TBF.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]