| Literature DB >> 32318445 |
Seyed Mehdi Hosseini1, Reza Fekrazad2, Hamid Malekzadeh1, Parviz Farzadinia3, Mohammadreza Hajiani3.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Burn can happen in any area and causes dominant changes in the quality of normal tissues. The aim of present article is evaluation and comparison the effect of milk, natural honey, and combination of honey-milk on healing of burnt wound. METHOD AND MATERIAL: A 4-week trial study was carried out on 10 Albino New Zealand rabbits. All dry burned wound was created on the back of the scapula by a 1 * 1 cm metal block. First group received honey dressing, second group milk dressing, third group honey-milk dressing, and the fourth group 5% sulfadiazine dressing. Sampling was performed at days 1, 10, and 20. Measurement of wound size was done in days 1, 7, 14, 21, 28. The obtained data and information were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Duncan tests using SPSS.Entities:
Keywords: Honey; milk; wound dressing; wound healing
Year: 2020 PMID: 32318445 PMCID: PMC7113970 DOI: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_801_19
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Family Med Prim Care ISSN: 2249-4863
Figure 1Preparation of second degree dry burn wound on back of rabit
Figure 3Clinical evaluation and wound size measurement in day 14,21,28
Kolmogorov Smirnov test and Shapiro Wilk test for different dressing
| Variability | Shapiro- Wilk test | Variability | Kamolmogorov- Smirnov Test | Dressing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.508 | 0.920 | 0.210* | 0.137 | Milk |
| 0.274 | 0.881 | 0.234* | 0.162 | Honey |
| 0.117 | 0.921 | 0.189* | 0.125 | Honey-milk |
Levin test result for different dressing
| Levin test | Variebality | Dressing |
|---|---|---|
| 0.257 | 0.616 | Milk |
| 0.155 | 0.697 | Honey |
| 0.437 | 0.513 | Honey-milk |
One-way ANOVA Results for milk group dressing
| Day | Average | Standard deviation | 95% | F | Valuability | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Min | Max | |||||
| 0 | 1.00000 | 0.000000 | 1.00000 | 1.00000 | 35.230 | 0.000 |
| 7 | 0.96310 | 0.033238 | 0.93932 | 0.98688 | ||
| 14 | 0.84890 | 0.037403 | 0.82214 | 0.87566 | ||
| 21 | 0.72280 | 0.035835 | 0.69716 | 0.74844 | ||
| 28 | 0.57900 | 0.021700 | 0.56348 | 0.59452 | ||
| Control | 0.87328 | 0.114510 | 0.84074 | 0.90582 | ||
| Sum | 0.84802 | 0.140586 | 0.82012 | 0.87592 | ||
One-way ANOVA Results for combination of hone- milk group dressing
| Day | Average | Standard deviation | % 95 | F | Valuability | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Min | Max | |||||
| 0 | 1.00000 | 0.000000 | 1.00000 | 1.00000 | 74.792 | 0.000 |
| 7 | 0.83940 | 0.049072 | 0.80430 | 0.87450 | ||
| 14 | 0.68240 | 0.039503 | 0.65414 | 0.71066 | ||
| 21 | 0.55230 | 0.039503 | 0.52404 | 0.58056 | ||
| 28 | 0.42860 | 0.035072 | 0.40351 | 0.45369 | ||
| Control | 0.87328 | 0.114510 | 0.84074 | 0.90582 | ||
| Sum | 0.78691 | 0.188065 | 0.74959 | 0.82423 | ||
Figure 4Mean dressed wound size in different (0,7,14,21,28) days in different group of dressing(milk, honey, combination of honey-milk) in recipient rabbits
Figure 5The micrograph of skin section in different group of dressing in day10. a: Milk, b: Honey, c: Honey-milk combination
One-way ANOVA Results for honey group dressing
| Day | Average | Standard deviation | %95 | F | Valuability | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Min | Max | |||||
| 0 | 1.00000 | 0.000000 | 1.00000 | 1.00000 | 39.858 | 0.000 |
| 7 | 0.87820 | 0.064249 | 0.83224 | 0.92416 | ||
| 14 | 0.74280 | 0.042632 | 0.71230 | 0.77330 | ||
| 21 | 0.66120 | 0.041747 | 0.63134 | 0.69106 | ||
| 28 | 0.54740 | 0.048990 | 0.51235 | 0.58245 | ||
| Control | 0.87328 | 0.114510 | 0.84074 | 0.90582 | ||
| Sum | 0.81960 | 0.152023 | 0.78944 | 0.84976 | ||