Nanocellulose significantly reduces number of anesthetics, hospital days, and in-patient dressing changes compared to PU-Foam Dressing: A prospective cohort study in children
Miriam Renkert, Florentine Günter, Christoph Mohr, Kristina Maurer, Merely Michaela Klinke Petrowsky, Michael Boettcher, Julia Elrod
{"title":"Nanocellulose significantly reduces number of anesthetics, hospital days, and in-patient dressing changes compared to PU-Foam Dressing: A prospective cohort study in children","authors":"Miriam Renkert, Florentine Günter, Christoph Mohr, Kristina Maurer, Merely Michaela Klinke Petrowsky, Michael Boettcher, Julia Elrod","doi":"10.1016/j.burns.2024.07.010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Pediatric thermal injuries can have profound physical and psychological effects. Long-term care, including wound dressing selection, significantly impacts outcomes. This study compared treatment related variables and long-term results of bacterial nanocellulose (BNC) and polyurethane foam (PU-foam) dressings in pediatric burn care.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A prospective cohort study comparing BNC (2018–2020) and PU-foam (2016–2018) in pediatric burn patients. Data included demographics, wound characteristics, infection rates, treatment duration, anesthesia procedures, dressing changes, scar assessments (POSAS, VSS), colorimeter measurements, and quality of life (CDLQI). Regression analyses were performed to correct for differences in burn depth.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>After correction for burn depth, BNC showed a shorter hospital stay duration (p = 0.007), a lower number of procedures under general anesthesia (p<0.0001) and a reduced number of inpatient dressing changes (p = 0.006), compared to PU-foam, whereas wound infection rates did not differ between the treatment groups (p = 0.169). Scar outcomes (POSAS, VSS, colorimeter measurements) and quality of life (CDLQI) were comparable for both treatments.</div></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><div>BNC dressing benefits include significantly fewer anesthesia procedures, a reduced number of inpatient dressing changes and a shorter hospital stays, supporting the use of BNC dressing. Long-term scar outcomes with BNC are comparable to established dressings like PU-foam. Further randomized trials are necessary to confirm these findings.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50717,"journal":{"name":"Burns","volume":"50 9","pages":"Article 107206"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Burns","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305417924002080","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Pediatric thermal injuries can have profound physical and psychological effects. Long-term care, including wound dressing selection, significantly impacts outcomes. This study compared treatment related variables and long-term results of bacterial nanocellulose (BNC) and polyurethane foam (PU-foam) dressings in pediatric burn care.
Methods
A prospective cohort study comparing BNC (2018–2020) and PU-foam (2016–2018) in pediatric burn patients. Data included demographics, wound characteristics, infection rates, treatment duration, anesthesia procedures, dressing changes, scar assessments (POSAS, VSS), colorimeter measurements, and quality of life (CDLQI). Regression analyses were performed to correct for differences in burn depth.
Results
After correction for burn depth, BNC showed a shorter hospital stay duration (p = 0.007), a lower number of procedures under general anesthesia (p<0.0001) and a reduced number of inpatient dressing changes (p = 0.006), compared to PU-foam, whereas wound infection rates did not differ between the treatment groups (p = 0.169). Scar outcomes (POSAS, VSS, colorimeter measurements) and quality of life (CDLQI) were comparable for both treatments.
Discussion
BNC dressing benefits include significantly fewer anesthesia procedures, a reduced number of inpatient dressing changes and a shorter hospital stays, supporting the use of BNC dressing. Long-term scar outcomes with BNC are comparable to established dressings like PU-foam. Further randomized trials are necessary to confirm these findings.
期刊介绍：
Burns aims to foster the exchange of information among all engaged in preventing and treating the effects of burns. The journal focuses on clinical, scientific and social aspects of these injuries and covers the prevention of the injury, the epidemiology of such injuries and all aspects of treatment including development of new techniques and technologies and verification of existing ones. Regular features include clinical and scientific papers, state of the art reviews and descriptions of burn-care in practice.
Topics covered by Burns include: the effects of smoke on man and animals, their tissues and cells; the responses to and treatment of patients and animals with chemical injuries to the skin; the biological and clinical effects of cold injuries; surgical techniques which are, or may be relevant to the treatment of burned patients during the acute or reconstructive phase following injury; well controlled laboratory studies of the effectiveness of anti-microbial agents on infection and new materials on scarring and healing; inflammatory responses to injury, effectiveness of related agents and other compounds used to modify the physiological and cellular responses to the injury; experimental studies of burns and the outcome of burn wound healing; regenerative medicine concerning the skin.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
