Bismuth/petroleum gauze plus high density polyethylene vs. bismuth/petroleum gauze: A comparison of donor site healing and patient comfort

Abstract

IntroductionSkin grafting continues to be a fundamental component of burn treatment and inherently, a donor site must be created and treated. Burn surgeons agree that specific dressings may have a significant affect on donor site healing, but we have no consensus as to which dressing provides maximum benefit. MethodsRetrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from an observational, within-patient controlled assessment of a practice pattern intervention. The project compared donor sites treated with high-density polyethylene plus an overlying layer of bismuth/petroleum gauze to donor sites treated with bismuth/petroleum gauze alone. The primary endpoint was patient reported pain using a standard visual analog scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). A 2-point reduction in pain was considered clinically significant. Healing was defined as complete detachment of the dressings and> 95% wound re-epitheliazation. ResultsA total of 30 patients were observed and analyzed. Both dressings were associated with a mean pain rating of 6 out of 10 (STD= ± 2) and a median pain rating of 6 out of 10 (range = 0–10). Additionally, both dressings were associated with a mean healing time of 20 days (SEM=1.1). The subjective dressing preference showed that a majority of patients had no preference between the two modalities (n = 20). However, when an actual preference was stated (n = 10), bismuth/petroleum gauze alone was preferred by 9 out of 10 patients. ConclusionClinically and subjectively, we found no discernible differences between the 2 dressing regimens. Thus, bismuth/petroleum gauze alone is the more cost effective dressing choice. Our burn center continues to use bismuth/petroleum gauze alone as its standard of care for donor site dressings and will continue to try to define the optimal donor site dressing.