Abstract
Background
All wounds that cannot be closed primarily needs skin coverage earliest to prevent form infections. Skin graft provides earliest and easiest wound coverage, but produces another wound, i.e. donor site wound. This study is conducted to see healing time efficacy of topical heparin spray versus conventional dressing in healing donor site wounds.
METHODOLOGY
The study was designed as a single center, prospective, randomized control trial study. It was conducted in the Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery at Civil Hospital Karachi. The study was carried out for 10 months of the period from Sep 2020 to July 2021. The sample was calculated by using OpenEpi version 3.01.The minimum sample size was calculated to be 8 at 95% confidence level and 80% power, though the study included 60 patients who underwent split thickness skin grafting for healthy granulating wounds. From the next day of surgery heparin dressing and conventional dressings groups were made and dressing was done daily till seventh postoperative day. Data in form of questionnaire and photographic assessment was recorded filled at every change of dressing. This study was a self-controlled trial, therefore every trial participant served as his/her own control. Data was analyzed by using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS version 24).
RESULT
The results of the analysis showed the mean age of the participants was (35.30 ± 8.87). Male gender predominated with a frequency of 82% while females were 18%. A decrease in soakage of dressing was recorded in 48 (98.0%) male participants at interventional half; however, all females experienced no difference at both dressing sites. Similarly 48 (98.0%) male participants a reduction in itching at intervention site and all females had experienced no difference in itching at both dressing sites. In regard to wound size, 40% of participants showed a reduction in wound size and only 20% showed no improvement at interventional half. During 7days, 81.67% of participants showed improvement in edema at intervention half and 96.7% of participants reported no change in edema with conventional therapy. None of the participants scored worst pain at the intervention area.
CONCLUSION
The study showed heparin irrigation result in better wound healing and significantly reduces pain, edema, enhances faster healing and reduces soakage of dressings.
Trial registration:
The study was approved by Institutional Review Board of Dow University of Health Sciences and was registered at Clinical Trials.gov (ID: NCT04613336).