• P J Terrill, R C W Goh, and M J Bailey.
• Department of Surgery, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. pjterril@bigpond.net.au
• J Wound Care. 2007 Nov 1;16(10):433-8.

ObjectiveTo identify the optimal dressing for split-thickness skin graft (SSG) donor sites.MethodThis prospective randomised controlled trial compared two dressings - a new absorbent form of a polyurethane film dressing (Tegaderm Absorbent, 3M) and our standard alginate dressing (Kaltostat, ConvaTec) - on SSG donor sites in 40 patients. Primary outcome measures were: reduced time to full healing; reduced postoperative pain; reduced leakage rates from the dressing. Secondary outcome measures related to acceptability of the dressings to the patient.ResultsOn removal of the dressings at the first assessment, 79% of the Tegaderm Absorbent donor sites had healed completely, compared with 16% of the Kaltostat ones (p<0.001).A significantly greater median area had healed with Tegaderm Absorbent (100%), when compared with Kaltostat (89%) (p<0.001). Mean time to complete healing was also significantly faster for Tegaderm Absorbent than Kaltostat (14 versus 21 days) (p<0.001). Significantly fewer subjects experienced postoperative pain with Tegaderm Absorbent on both day 1 (21% versus 67%, p=0.006, NNT=3) and day 2 (17% versus 75%, p<0.001, NNT=2). Leakage rates reduced by 48% with Tegaderm Absorbent, with no leakage in the smaller donor sites. Tegaderm Absorbent was significantly easier to apply than Kaltostat (89% versus 27% found it'very easy') as was ease of removal (84% versus 11% found it'very easy') (p<0.0001). Patients found Tegaderm Absorbent dressings significantly more convenient to manage and bathe with. At one month post-surgery, Vancouver scar scores showed thatTegaderm Absorbent donor sites were less red, flatter, softer and less itchy.ConclusionTegaderm Absorbent provides a significant improvement in terms of donor-site pain, healing and ease of management.

42 keywords...

hide…