Microbial cellulose dressing compared with silver sulphadiazine for the treatment of partial thickness burns: A prospective, randomised, clinical trial
Burns Jul 20, 2018
Aboelnaga A, et al. - Researchers performed a comparison of microbial cellulose with silver sulphadiazine as a dressing for partial thickness burns. Findings suggest the superiority of the microbial cellulose dressing for treatment of partial thickness burns than silver sulphadiazine cream. It was associated with the requirement for fewer dressings of the wound and lower pain scores, indicating it as valuable for the patients and the health care system. They suggest accounting the differences in randomization of the area of burns while interpreting the results.
Methods
- Researchers undertook a randomised clinical trial.
- For this trial, they screened all patients who presented with partial thickness (superficial and deep dermal) burns from October 2014 to October 2016.
- Each group comprised 20 patients: the cellulose group was treated with microbial cellulose sheets and the control group with silver sulphadiazine cream 10 mg/g.
- Every third day, they evaluated the wound.
- They used the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability (FLACC) scale to assess pain during and after each procedure.
- Age, sex, percentage total body surface area burned (TBSA%), clinical signs of infection, time for epithelialisation and hospital stay were the other variables recorded.
- They analysed the significance of differences between the treatment groups, using linear multivariable regression, by adjusting for the size and depth of the burn, and the patient’s age.
Results
- Findings suggested median TBSA% of 9% (IQR 5.5–12.5).
- In the cellulose group, the median number of dressing changes was 1 (IQR 1–2), which was lower than that in the control group (median 9.5, IQR 6–16) (p < 0.001).
- In multivariable regression analysis, the group treated with microbial cellulose spent 6.3 (95% CI 0.2–12.5) fewer days in hospital (p=0.04), had a mean score that was 3.4 (95% CI 2.5–4.3) points lower during wound care (p < 0.001), and 2.2 (95% CI 1.6–2.7) afterwards (p < 0.001).
- Researchers observed non significant quicker epithelialisation.
Only Doctors with an M3 India account can read this article. Sign up for free or login with your existing account.
4 reasons why Doctors love M3 India
-
Exclusive Write-ups & Webinars by KOLs
-
Daily Quiz by specialty
-
Paid Market Research Surveys
-
Case discussions, News & Journals' summaries