A retrospective cohort study of Acticoat™ versus Silvazine™ in a paediatric population
Cuttle, Leila, Naidu, S., Mill, J., Hoskins, W., Das, K., & Kimble, R. M. (2007) A retrospective cohort study of Acticoat™ versus Silvazine™ in a paediatric population. Burns, 33(6), pp. 701-7.
We wished to determine whether changing our centre's practice of using Acticoat instead of Silvazine as our first-line burns dressing provided a better standard of care in terms of efficacy, cost and ease of use. A retrospective cohort study was performed examining 328 Silvazine treated patients from January 2000 to June 2001 and 241 Acticoat treated patients from July 2002 to July 2003. During those periods the respective dressings were used exclusively. There was no significant difference in age, %BSA and mechanism of burn between the groups. In the Silvazine group, 25.6% of children required grafting compared to 15.4% in the Acticoat group (p=0.001). When patients requiring grafting were excluded, the time taken for re-epithelialisation in the Acticoat group (14.9 days) was significantly less than that for the Silvazine group (18.3 days), p=0.047. There were more wounds requiring long term scar management in the Silvazine group (32.6%) compared to the Acticoat group (29.5%), however this was not significant. There was only one positive blood culture in each group, indicating that both Silvazine and Acticoat are potent antimicrobial agents. The use of Acticoat as our primary burns dressing has dramatically changed our clinical practice. Inpatients are now only 18% of the total admissions, with the vast majority of patients treated on an outpatient basis. In terms of cost, Acticoat was demonstrated to be less expensive over the treatment period than Silvazine . We have concluded that Acticoat is a safe, cost-effective, efficacious dressing that reduces the time for re-epithelialisation and the requirement for grafting and long term scar management, compared to Silvazine.
Impact and interest:
Citation counts are sourced monthly from and citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Additional Information:||Cuttle, Leila
Kimble, Roy M
Burns. 2007 Sep;33(6):701-7. Epub 2007 Jul 17.
|Keywords:||Anti-Infective Agents, Local/economics/*therapeutic use, Burns/economics/*therapy, Caregivers/psychology, Child, Preschool, Cohort Studies, Consumer Satisfaction, Costs and Cost Analysis, Humans, Length of Stay, Ointments, Polyesters/economics/*therapeutic use, Polyethylenes/economics/*therapeutic use, Retrospective Studies, Silver Sulfadiazine/economics/*therapeutic use, Skin Transplantation/economics/statistics & numerical data, Treatment Outcome|
|ISSN:||1879-1409 (online) 0305-4179 (Print)|
|Divisions:||Current > Schools > School of Biomedical Sciences
Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Health
Current > Institutes > Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation
|Copyright Owner:||Copyright 2007 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved.|
|Deposited On:||27 Feb 2014 00:07|
|Last Modified:||26 Mar 2014 00:19|
Repository Staff Only: item control page