Efficacy and optimal dose of acetic acid to treat colonised burns wounds: protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial

Author:

Imran RizwanaORCID,Hassouna Tarek,Sur Gurneet,Casey Anna,Homer Victoria,Barton Darren,Brock Kristian,Altarrah Khaled,Moiemen Naiem

Abstract

IntroductionDespite of recent advancement in the burns wound management, burn wound infection (BWI) is still one of the major cause of burns mortality. Patients who survive their burns injury still suffers from BWI related complication like delayed wound healing and poor scarring. BWI has been treated by application of topical antimicrobial agents or systemic antibiotics. Due to the global risk of developing systemic antibiotics resistance, medical research focuses on identifying single topical agent which has effective antimicrobial activity, easily available and cost effective. One such agent is acetic acid (AA). AA has been used as a topical antibacterial agent for the treatment of burns wounds for many years and has shown to have activity against gram-negative organisms includingPseudomonas aeruginosa. So far there has been no consensus on optimal concentration that has effective antimicrobial activity, frequency of application, duration of treatment and most importantly good patient’s tolerability. A randomised control study is required to answer all these questions.ObjectiveTo investigate the efficacy and tolerability of 0.5% and 2% of AA when applied to colonised burns wounds for 3 days after admittance to the Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham.Methods and analysisThis is a double-blinded, prospective, randomised, controlled, single-centre trial. Patients will be screened for eligibility in the inpatient area and those who are found to be eligible will be randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups: group 1: 0.5% AA (10 patients); group 2: 2% AA (10 patients); total number: 20 patients.Outcome measuresPrimary outcome: Efficacy will be assessed by measuring the bacterial load from microbiology wound swabs for three consecutive days.Secondary outcomes: (1) The assessment of antimicrobial activity of AA and the minimum inhibitory concentrations. (2) Patient’s tolerance by assessing Visual Analogue Scale pain score. (3) Time to 95% wound healing of treatment area. (4) Patient’s perceived treatment allocation.Ethics and disseminationAceticA trial protocol was approved by the National Research Ethics Service (West Midlands—Edgbaston Research Ethics Committee; 17/WM/0407; IRAS 234132). This article refers to protocol version 5.0 dated 6 July 2020. The analysed results will be presented at national and international conferences related to management of burn patients. The generated articles based on the trial results will be submitted to peer review journals for publication.Trial registration numberISRCTN11636684.

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

General Medicine

Reference24 articles.

1. National burn repository 2006: A ten-year review;Latenser;Journal of Burn Care & Research,2007

2. Risk Factors for Nosocomial Infection and Mortality in Burn Patients

3. Burn wound infections: Current status;World J Surg,1998

4. Survival benefit conferred by topical antimicrobial preparations in burn patients: a historical perspective;Brown;The Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care,2004

5. Burn Wound Infections

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3