| Literature DB >> 31143693 |
Simin Jahani1, Hadis Ashrafizadeh2, Kamran Babai3, Amir Siahpoosh4, Bahman Cheraghian5.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Burn wound healing is one of the problems of medical sciences and it is of great importance to find a drug or substance that can heal burn wounds with minimum complications. The present study aimed to evaluate the effect of ointment-based egg white on healing second-degree burn wounds.Entities:
Keywords: Burn; Egg white; Patient; Silver sulfadiazine; Traditional medicine
Year: 2019 PMID: 31143693 PMCID: PMC6526036
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Avicenna J Phytomed ISSN: 2228-7930
Comparison of demographic characteristic between the studied groups
| Demographic variables | control (n=45) | intervention (n=45) | Total |
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | n | % | N | % | |||
| Age | 18-30 | 16 | 35 | 18 | 40 | 34 | 37 | 0.78 |
| 31-40 | 20 | 44 | 13 | 28 | 33 | 36 | ||
| 41-50 | 5 | 11 | 6 | 13 | 11 | 12 | ||
| 51-65 | 4 | 8 | 8 | 17 | 12 | 13 | ||
| Gender | Male | 23 | 51 | 18 | 40 | 41 | 45 | 0.4 |
| Female | 22 | 48 | 27 | 60 | 49 | 54 | ||
| Educational level | Elementary | 13 | 28 | 15 | 33 | 28 | 31 | 0.071 |
| Middle school | 3 | 6 | 10 | 22 | 13 | 14 | ||
| Diploma | 25 | 55 | 15 | 33 | 40 | 44 | ||
| Bachelor and higher | 4 | 8 | 5 | 11 | 9 | 9 | ||
| Economic level | Under one million | 4 | 8 | 14 | 31 | 18 | 20 | 0.099 |
| Between one to three million | 36 | 80 | 27 | 60 | 63 | 70 | ||
| Above three million | 5 | 11 | 4 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ||
| Occupational | Unemployed | 9 | 20 | 9 | 20 | 18 | 20 | 0.8 |
| Employee | 14 | 31 | 10 | 22 | 24 | 26 | ||
| Free | 8 | 17 | 9 | 20 | 17 | 18 | ||
| Housewife | 14 | 31 | 17 | 37 | 31 | 34 | ||
Data are presented as number (%)
Independent T-Test,
: Chi-square Test,
Fisher tests.
Comparison of characteristics burn wound between the studied groups
| Characteristics wound | control (n=45) | intervention (n=45) | Total |
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | n | % | n | % | |||
| Burn percentage | Between 0-3 | 30 | 69 | 31 | 67 | 61 | 66 | 0.59 |
| Between 3-6 | 10 | 21 | 12 | 25 | 22 | 23 | ||
| Between 6-12 | 5 | 10 | 2 | 4 | 7 | 14 | ||
| Burn depth | Second degree superficial | 38 | 84 | 35 | 77 | 73 | 81 | 0.6 |
| Second degree depth | 7 | 15 | 10 | 22 | 18 | 18 | ||
| Location of burn | Upper member | 27 | 60 | 28 | 62 | 55 | 61 | 0.56 |
| Lower member | 18 | 40 | 17 | 37 | 35 | 38 | ||
| Shape of burn | Irregular | 6 | 13 | 9 | 20 | 15 | 16 | 0.68 |
| Round and oval | 24 | 53 | 20 | 44 | 44 | 48 | ||
| Linear | 3 | 6 | 6 | 13 | 9 | 10 | ||
| Screw and crook | 6 | 13 | 6 | 13 | 12 | 13 | ||
| Other forms | 6 | 13 | 4 | 8 | 10 | 10 | ||
Data are presented as number (%)
: Independent T-Test,
: Chi-square Test,
: Fisher tests.
Variables related to the burn wound between the studied groups
| Bates-Jensen wound assessment tool | 1st Day | 7th Day | 15th Day |
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| mean | SD | mean | SD | mean | SD | |||
| Wound size | Control group | 2 | 0.9 | 2 | 0.78 | 1 | 0.86 | 0.32 |
| Intervention group | 2 | 1.08 | 2 | 1.03 | 1 | 0.75 | ||
| Wound depth | Control group | 2 | 0.28 | 2 | 0.48 | 1 | 0.53 | <0.001 |
| Intervention group | 2 | 0.42 | 1 | 0.48 | 1 | 0.14 | ||
| Wound edges | Control group | 2 | 0.69 | 2 | 0.39 | 1 | 0.60 | <0.001 |
| Intervention group | 2 | 0.66 | 1 | 0.50 | 1 | 0.25 | ||
| Undermining | Control group | 2 | 0.53 | 2 | 0.57 | 1 | 0.61 | <0.001 |
| Intervention group | 2 | 0.79 | 1 | 0.58 | 1 | 0.14 | ||
| Necrotic tissue type | Control group | 2 | 0.43 | 2 | 0.68 | 1 | 0.54 | <0.001 |
| Intervention group | 2 | 0.79 | 1 | 0.57 | 1 | 0.29 | ||
| Amount of necrosis | Control group | 2 | 0.62 | 1 | 0.48 | 1 | 0.53 | <0.001 |
| Intervention group | 2 | 0.78 | 1 | 0.51 | 1 | 0.14 | ||
| Exudate type | Control group | 3 | 0.47 | 2 | 0.95 | 1 | 0.81 | <0.001 |
| Intervention group | 3 | 0.71 | 1 | 0.70 | 1 | 0 | ||
| Amount of exudate | Control group | 3 | 0.66 | 2 | 0.67 | 1 | 0.58 | <0.001 |
| Intervention group | 3 | 0.96 | 1 | 0.66 | 1 | 0 | ||
| Surrounding skin color | Control group | 3 | 0.86 | 2 | 0.72 | 1 | 0.78 | <0.001 |
| Intervention group | 2 | 0.98 | 1 | 0.52 | 1 | 0.14 | ||
| Induration | Control group | 2 | 0.68 | 2 | 0.66 | 1 | 0.70 | <0.001 |
| Intervention group | 2 | 0.96 | 1 | 0.52 | 1 | 0.14 | ||
| Peripheral edema | Control group | 2 | 0.63 | 1 | 0.56 | 1 | 0.61 | <0.001 |
| Intervention group | 3 | 1.12 | 1 | 0.48 | 1 | 0.29 | ||
| Granulation tissue | Control group | 4 | 0.20 | 3 | 0.70 | 1 | 0.80 | <0.001 |
| Intervention group | 4 | 0.55 | 1 | 0.57 | 1 | 0.20 | ||
| Epithelialization tissue | Control group | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0.67 | 1 | 0.71 | <0.001 |
| Intervention group | 4 | 0.50 | 1 | 0.50 | 1 | 0.14 | ||
Data are presented as mean ± SD; n= 45
: repeated measures ANOVA Test, SD
: Standard deviation.
Comparison of mean wound healing in three time intervals between the studied groups
| mean wound healing | 1st Day | 7th Day | 15th Day |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| mean | SD | mean | SD | mean | SD | ||
| Control group | 42.04 | 4.1 | 31.42 | 4.8 | 21.51 | 5.7 | <0.001 |
| Intervention group | 41.46 | 6.6 | 19.73 | 5.42 | 13.75 | 1.83 | |
Data are presented as mean ± SD; n= 45
: repeated measures ANOVA Test.
Figure 1Comparison of mean wound healing percentage in three time intervals between the studied groups. Data are presented as mean ± SD; n= 45; *p<0.001 Compared to control group. (A) Control; (B) intervention
Figure 2Comparison of treatment time in three time intervals between the studied groups. (A) Control; (B) intervention