C T Lau1, K K Y Wong2, P Tam2. 1. Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, Hong Kong. eugenelauct@hotmail.com. 2. Queen Mary Hospital, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, Hong Kong.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Burn injury is one of the most common reasons for admission in paediatric population. There is currently no international consensus on the best wound dressing material. Aquacel Ag, a new silver containing hydrofiber dressing material has been reported to produce good clinical results. Yet, only a limited number of studies exist in the paediatric population. This study aims to review our experience of burn management over the past 5 years and to evaluate the effectiveness of Aquacel Ag in the management of partial thickness burns. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients admitted for burn injury between January 2010 and December 2014 was conducted. Patients' demographics, mechanism of injury, body surface areas involved, treatment applied, and clinical outcomes were analyzed. Patients with superficial injury, full thickness burns that required surgical debridement, burn area less than 2 % or more than 25 % of total body surface area, or incomplete clinical data were excluded from the comparative study. RESULTS: A total of 119 patients were identified. 114 (96 %) was due to domestic injury, of which 108 (91 %) was food-related. The most commonly affected areas were limbs (n = 89, 74.8 %), followed by trunk (n = 62, 74.8). 84 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were recruited into the study. 31 patients received Aquacel Ag dressing and 53 patients received standard paraffin gauze dressing. The two groups showed no statistical difference in age, sex, percentage of total body surface area involved, and infection rate. Outcomes of patients treated with Aquacel Ag were compared with patients treated with standard dressing. The mean hospital stay was significantly shorter for the Aquacel Ag group (14.26 vs 23.45, p = 0.045). Aquacel Ag group required much less frequent dressing change (5.67 vs 20.59, p = 0.002). 5 patients in standard dressing group developed hypertrophic scar and required prolonged pressure garment, whereas only one hypertrophic scar was observed in the Aquacel Ag group. CONCLUSION: Aquacel Ag appears to promote early burn wound healing with less hypertrophic scar formation.
INTRODUCTION:Burn injury is one of the most common reasons for admission in paediatric population. There is currently no international consensus on the best wound dressing material. Aquacel Ag, a new silver containing hydrofiber dressing material has been reported to produce good clinical results. Yet, only a limited number of studies exist in the paediatric population. This study aims to review our experience of burn management over the past 5 years and to evaluate the effectiveness of Aquacel Ag in the management of partial thickness burns. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients admitted for burn injury between January 2010 and December 2014 was conducted. Patients' demographics, mechanism of injury, body surface areas involved, treatment applied, and clinical outcomes were analyzed. Patients with superficial injury, full thickness burns that required surgical debridement, burn area less than 2 % or more than 25 % of total body surface area, or incomplete clinical data were excluded from the comparative study. RESULTS: A total of 119 patients were identified. 114 (96 %) was due to domestic injury, of which 108 (91 %) was food-related. The most commonly affected areas were limbs (n = 89, 74.8 %), followed by trunk (n = 62, 74.8). 84 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were recruited into the study. 31 patients received Aquacel Ag dressing and 53 patients received standard paraffin gauze dressing. The two groups showed no statistical difference in age, sex, percentage of total body surface area involved, and infection rate. Outcomes of patients treated with Aquacel Ag were compared with patients treated with standard dressing. The mean hospital stay was significantly shorter for the Aquacel Ag group (14.26 vs 23.45, p = 0.045). Aquacel Ag group required much less frequent dressing change (5.67 vs 20.59, p = 0.002). 5 patients in standard dressing group developed hypertrophic scar and required prolonged pressure garment, whereas only one hypertrophic scar was observed in the Aquacel Ag group. CONCLUSION: Aquacel Ag appears to promote early burn wound healing with less hypertrophic scar formation.
Authors: Jun Tian; Kenneth K Y Wong; Chi-Ming Ho; Chun-Nam Lok; Wing-Yiu Yu; Chi-Ming Che; Jen-Fu Chiu; Paul K H Tam Journal: ChemMedChem Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 3.466
Authors: Matthew Brown; Stuart R Dalziel; Eleanor Herd; Kathryn Johnson; Richard Wong She; Michael Shepherd Journal: J Burn Care Res Date: 2016 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 1.845
Authors: Daniel M Caruso; Kevin N Foster; Sigri A Blome-Eberwein; John A Twomey; David N Herndon; Arnold Luterman; Paul Silverstein; Jeffrey R Antimarino; Gregory J Bauer Journal: J Burn Care Res Date: 2006 May-Jun Impact factor: 1.845
Authors: Joseph J Castellano; Susan M Shafii; Francis Ko; Guillermo Donate; Terry E Wright; Rudolph J Mannari; Wyatt G Payne; David J Smith; Martin C Robson Journal: Int Wound J Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 3.315
Authors: Aba Lőrincz; Anna Gabriella Lamberti; Zsolt Juhász; András Garami; Gergő Józsa Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2021-11-05 Impact factor: 1.817