A Prospective Randomized, Controlled Study on Comparison of Wound Healing with Type I Collagen Dressing & Conventional Dressing in Burns Patients
- 1. Assistant Professor, Department of General Surgery, SCB Medical College, Cuttack
- 2. Assistant Professor, Department of General Medicine, SCB Medical College, Cuttack
- 3. Assistant Professor, Department of Anaesthesiology, SJMCH, Puri
Description
Introduction: The wound healing mechanism has changed in an exciting manner. The planned sequence of events consists of a beautiful cascade of happenings. The science of wound healing has evolved dramatically during the past several decades. Wound treatment used to be purely reliant on historical observations and tales, which might date back millennia in certain cases. This research compared wound healing with type I collagen dressing against traditional dressing with ointment and gauze. Aim of Study: This Prospective Randomized Controlled study was conducted to compare the wound healing with Type I collagen dressing and conventional dressing with ointment, gauze-pad & bandage, with respect to the following criteria:
(1) Their efficacy on wound healing in Burn patients. (2) The ability to prevent infection. (3) The effect on the morbidity. (4) The cost effectiveness. Results: The type-1 collagen group achieved full wound healing in 14-18 days, but the standard dressing group needed 16-26 days.50% of patients in the traditional dressing group had infection, but more than 90% of patients in the type-1 collagen dressing group had no infection. morbidity such as discomfort, leaking, and odour are more prevalent in the traditional dressing group, however early mobilisation, and capacity to care for the shelf are more prevalent in the type-1 collagen dressing group. Change of dressing was least with collagen. Conclusion: Collagen dressing has the extra virtue of not requiring any skin grafting. There is a greater prevalence of wound infection, increased leaking, and odour from the wound in the standard dressing group. Infections are substantially less common when type-1 collagen dressing is utilised. As a result, type-1 collagen dressing has a superior reaction to burn patients than traditional dressing.
Abstract (English)
Introduction: The wound healing mechanism has changed in an exciting manner. The planned sequence of events consists of a beautiful cascade of happenings. The science of wound healing has evolved dramatically during the past several decades. Wound treatment used to be purely reliant on historical observations and tales, which might date back millennia in certain cases. This research compared wound healing with type I collagen dressing against traditional dressing with ointment and gauze. Aim of Study: This Prospective Randomized Controlled study was conducted to compare the wound healing with Type I collagen dressing and conventional dressing with ointment, gauze-pad & bandage, with respect to the following criteria:
(1) Their efficacy on wound healing in Burn patients. (2) The ability to prevent infection. (3) The effect on the morbidity. (4) The cost effectiveness. Results: The type-1 collagen group achieved full wound healing in 14-18 days, but the standard dressing group needed 16-26 days.50% of patients in the traditional dressing group had infection, but more than 90% of patients in the type-1 collagen dressing group had no infection. morbidity such as discomfort, leaking, and odour are more prevalent in the traditional dressing group, however early mobilisation, and capacity to care for the shelf are more prevalent in the type-1 collagen dressing group. Change of dressing was least with collagen. Conclusion: Collagen dressing has the extra virtue of not requiring any skin grafting. There is a greater prevalence of wound infection, increased leaking, and odour from the wound in the standard dressing group. Infections are substantially less common when type-1 collagen dressing is utilised. As a result, type-1 collagen dressing has a superior reaction to burn patients than traditional dressing.
Files
IJPCR,Vol15,Issue10,Article97.pdf
Files
(327.3 kB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:84c087d3408743dea195e5c7b2a5a2a1
|
327.3 kB | Preview Download |
Additional details
Dates
- Accepted
-
2023-09-30
Software
- Repository URL
- https://impactfactor.org/PDF/IJPCR/15/IJPCR,Vol15,Issue10,Article97.pdf
- Development Status
- Active
References
- 1. Bailey & Love's Short Practice of Surgery, 27th edition-RCG Russell, Norman S Williams, Christopher JK Bulstrode. 2. Sabiston TEXT BOOK OF SURGERY, The Biological Basis of Modern Surgical Practice, 1st South Asia edition- Townsend, Beauchamp, Evers, Mattox. 3. The Surgical Clinics of North America: Vol. 83, No.3, June 2003. Wound Healing - David L Steed MD 4. 4. Clinics in Plastic Surgery: Vol.27, No. 1, Jan 2000. Burn Care &Management - Edward A Luce MD. 5. Burns: 1990 Dec; 16(6): 457-61.Yang JY et al - Clinical application of collagen sheet, YCWM, as a burn wound dressing. 6. Peter Shakespeare. Burn wound healing and skin substitutes. Burns 2001;27(5): 517-522. 7. Bishara S. Atiyeha, Shady N. Hayeka and S. William Gunnb. New technologies for burn wound closure and healing-Review of the literature. Burns 2005: 31(8): 944-956. 8. Singh O, Gupta SS, Soni M, Moses S, Shukla S, Mathur RK. Collagen dressing versus conventional dressings in burn and chronic wounds: A retrospective study. J Cutan Aesthet Surg 2011; 4: 12-16. 9. Gerding RL, Emerman CL and Effron D,et al. Outpatient management of partial thickness burns: biobrane versus1% silver sulphadiazine. Annals of Emergency Medicine 1990;19:121. 10. Juan P Barret, et al. Biobrane versus 1% silver sulphadiazine in second degree pediatric burns. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 1999; 105(1): 62- 65.