Suppr超能文献

一种随机对照研究,比较了 Dermabond、Steri-Strips 和可吸收缝线修复简单裂伤后,由监护人感知的美容效果。

A Randomized Controlled Comparison of Guardian-Perceived Cosmetic Outcome of Simple Lacerations Repaired With Either Dermabond, Steri-Strips, or Absorbable Sutures.

机构信息

From the Division of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, Monroe Carell Jr. Children's Hospital at Vanderbilt.

Division of Pediatric Emergency Medicine, Children's Hospital of Orange County.

出版信息

Pediatr Emerg Care. 2024 Oct 1;40(10):700-704. doi: 10.1097/PEC.0000000000003244. Epub 2024 Aug 2.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare the guardian-perceived 3-month cosmetic outcome for pediatric lacerations repaired with absorbable sutures, Dermabond, or Steri-Strips. Secondarily, pain and satisfaction with the procedure from both guardian and provider perspectives were compared.

METHODS

In this randomized controlled trial, we enrolled a convenience sample of children aged 0 to <18 years who presented with simple linear lacerations (≤5 cm in length, ≤0.5 cm in width, and <12 hours old) to a pediatric emergency department. Children were randomized to receive laceration repair with absorbable sutures, Dermabond, or Steri-Strips. Topical L.E.T. solution (lidocaine, epinephrine, tetracaine) was applied to wounds which were then closed by the primary team. Guardians and providers completed questionnaires regarding perceived pain and satisfaction with the procedure. Guardians were contacted 3 months after the repair and asked to email a picture of the scar with their perception of cosmesis rated on a visual analog scale from 0 to 100.

RESULTS

Fifty-five patients were enrolled, of whom 30 completed 3-month follow-up (12 suture, 7 Dermabond, 11 Steri-strips). There was no statistical evidence of an association between scar appearance and closure method based on medians and interquartile ranges for cosmetic ratings of scar: suture median 70.5 (IQR 59.8-76.8), Dermabond median 85 (IQR 73-90), Steri-strips median 67 (IQR 55-78) ( P = 0.254). Guardian satisfaction with length of stay, guardian and physician satisfaction with the procedure, and guardian and physician-perceived pain also showed no differences.

CONCLUSIONS

No differences were observed in guardian-perceived cosmesis of simple lacerations repaired with sutures, Dermabond, or Steri-Strips when evaluated 3 months after intervention. In addition, there were no differences in guardian or physician-perceived pain or satisfaction with the closure methods. The results of this study suggest that all 3 closure methods appear to be clinically equivalent, which is largely consistent with other evidence. Further study should be expanded to a larger demographic.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较吸收缝线、Dermabond 和 Steri-Strips 修复小儿撕裂伤后,监护人在 3 个月时对美容效果的看法。其次,从监护人及医护人员的角度比较他们对治疗过程的疼痛及满意度。

方法

本随机对照试验纳入了因简单线性撕裂伤(长度≤5cm、宽度≤0.5cm、伤后时间<12 小时)至儿科急诊就诊的 0 至<18 岁儿童的便利样本。患儿随机接受吸收缝线、Dermabond 或 Steri-Strips 修复撕裂伤。伤口给予局部 L.E.T. 溶液(利多卡因、肾上腺素、丁卡因),然后由一线团队进行缝合。监护人及医护人员完成关于治疗过程疼痛及满意度的调查问卷。修复后 3 个月,联系监护人并要求其通过电子邮件发送伤口照片,并根据视觉模拟量表(0 至 100 分)对美容效果进行评价。

结果

共纳入 55 例患儿,其中 30 例完成 3 个月随访(12 例缝线、7 例 Dermabond、11 例 Steri-Strips)。根据美容评分的中位数和四分位距,疤痕外观与闭合方法之间无关联:缝线中位数 70.5(四分位距 59.8-76.8),Dermabond 中位数 85(四分位距 73-90),Steri-Strips 中位数 67(四分位距 55-78)(P=0.254)。监护人对住院时间、监护人及医生对治疗过程、监护人及医生对疼痛的满意度均无差异。

结论

在干预后 3 个月评估时,采用缝线、Dermabond 或 Steri-Strips 修复的简单撕裂伤,监护人对美容效果的看法无差异。此外,监护人及医生对闭合方法的疼痛及满意度也无差异。本研究结果表明,所有 3 种闭合方法在临床上似乎等效,这与其他证据基本一致。应进一步扩大研究范围,纳入更大的人群。

相似文献

6
Tissue adhesives for simple traumatic lacerations.
J Athl Train. 2008 Apr-Jun;43(2):222-4. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-43.2.222.
7
Pretreatment of lacerations with lidocaine, epinephrine, and tetracaine at triage: a randomized double-blind trial.
Acad Emerg Med. 2000 Jul;7(7):751-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2000.tb02262.x.

本文引用的文献

1
Tissue adhesive and adhesive tape for pediatric wound closure: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
J Pediatr Surg. 2021 May;56(5):1020-1029. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2020.07.037. Epub 2020 Aug 5.
2
Updates in emergency department laceration management.
Clin Exp Emerg Med. 2019 Jun;6(2):97-105. doi: 10.15441/ceem.18.018. Epub 2019 Apr 8.
3
Laceration Management.
J Emerg Med. 2017 Sep;53(3):369-382. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2017.05.026. Epub 2017 Aug 25.
4
Laceration Repair: A Practical Approach.
Am Fam Physician. 2017 May 15;95(10):628-636.
7
Facial lacerations in children.
J Craniofac Surg. 2013 Mar;24(2):671-5. doi: 10.1097/SCS.0b013e31828026d8.
8
Predictors of parent satisfaction in pediatric laceration repair.
Acad Emerg Med. 2012 Oct;19(10):1166-72. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2012.01454.x. Epub 2012 Oct 4.
10
Sutureless skin closure with isoamyl 2-cyanoacrylate in pediatric day-care surgery.
Pediatr Surg Int. 2009 Dec;25(12):1123-5. doi: 10.1007/s00383-009-2485-9. Epub 2009 Sep 17.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验