Abstract and Introduction
Abstract
Introduction: Restoration of an intact skin barrier is of utmost importance to prevent infection and wound contractures. Skin grafting is a rapid, effective method of wound coverage. The chief goal of management of the donor area is to achieve early epithelialization without infection. The donor areas need optimum local care to achieve this goal with minimal pain and in a cost-effective manner.
Objective: This study compared nonadhesive polyethylene dressings with chlorhexidine-impregnated tulle gras dressings for donor areas.
Material and Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, observational study in a tertiary hospital and included 60 patients with posttraumatic, postinfective, or burn wounds. Patients were randomized into 2 groups to receive either chlorhexidine-impregnated tulle gras or polyethylene film for donor area coverage. The pain score, comfort score, completeness of epithelialization, and sequelae were studied in both groups.
Results: Patients in the polyethylene film group showed a significantly better comfort score and reduced pain on day 14 as compared with the chlorhexidine group. Time to complete epithelialization was similar in both groups.
Conclusions: Polyethylene nonadhesive film dressing is a low-cost, inert, safe, and easily available alternative for donor area dressing and is superior to chlorhexidine-impregnated tulle gras in terms of pain and comfort.
Introduction
In wound care, restoration of an intact skin barrier is of utmost importance to prevent infection, minimize wound contraction, and to maintain function.[1] Skin grafting represents a very rapid and effective method of repairing the skin defect but creates a new donor site wound after the sheet of skin has been harvested. Depending on the thickness, site, size of the wound, and age of the patient, the donor site wound should re-epithelialize completely in 7 to 21 days.[2]
Donor site wounds are painful, and a delay in healing increases patient morbidity. Optimum local care for these donor sites should not only promote efficient wound healing but also be cost-effective and prevent pain, discomfort, infection, hypertrophic scarring, and hyperpigmentation. This study was done to obtain clarity on a low-cost, painless, comfortable wound cover for donor sites.
The objectives of this study were to compare the efficacy of chlorhexidine-impregnated tulle gras and polyethylene nonadhesive film dressing for STSG donor site wounds. Primary dressings that utilize moist wound healing principles, such as hydrocolloids and film dressings (ie, polyethylene drape), may be preferable to traditional mesh gauze dressings in the management of STSG donor sites.[3]
Wounds. 2023;35(2):41-46. © 2023 HMP Communications, LLC
