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: Comparison of the efficacy and safety of povidone-iodine foam dressing (Betafoam), hydrocellular foam dressing (Allevyn), and petrolatum gauze for split-thickness skin graft donor site dressing.
    Author: Pak CS, Park DH, Oh TS, Lee WJ, Jun YJ, Lee KA, Oh KS, Kwak KH, Rhie JW.
    Journal: Int Wound J; 2019 Apr; 16(2):379-386. PubMed ID: 30479060.
    Abstract:
    We evaluated the efficacy and safety of a povidone-iodine (PVP-I) foam dressing (Betafoam) for donor site dressing versus a hydrocellular foam dressing (Allevyn) and petrolatum gauze. This prospective Phase 4 study was conducted between March 2016 and April 2017 at eight sites in Korea. A total of 106 consenting patients (aged ≥ 19 years, scheduled for split-thickness skin graft) were randomised 1:1:1 to PVP-I foam, hydrocellular, or petrolatum gauze dressings for up to 28 days after donor site collection. We assessed time to complete epithelialisation, proportion with complete epithelialisation at Day 14, and wound infection. Epithelialisation time was the shortest with PVP-I foam dressing (12.74 ± 3.51 days) versus hydrocellular foam dressing (16.61 ± 4.45 days; P = 0.0003) and petrolatum gauze (15.06 ± 4.26 days, P = 0.0205). At Day 14, 83.87% of PVP-I foam dressing donor sites had complete epithelialisation, versus 36.36% of hydrocellular foam dressing donor sites (P = 0.0001) and 55.88% of petrolatum gauze donor sites (P = 0.0146). There were no wound infections. Incidence rates of adverse events were comparable across groups (P = 0.1940). PVP-I foam dressing required less time to complete epithelialisation and had a good safety profile.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]