A comparison of three wound dressings in patients undergoing heart surgery.

Two hundred fifty patients undergoing heart surgery were randomized in a prospective comparative study of a semiocclusive hydroactive wound dressing, an occlusive hydrocolloid dressing, and a conventional absorbent dressing. The wounds were evaluated during the 4 weeks after surgery. Color photographs were used for a blind evaluation of wound healing. The conventional absorbent dressing was more effective in wound healing, compared with the hydroactive dressing. Further, there were fewer skin changes and less redness in the wounds with the conventional dressing than with the hydroactive dressing; the differences were not significant with the hydrocolloid dressing. The conventional dressing was less painful to remove than the hydroactive and hydrocolloid dressings. More frequent dressing changes, however, were needed when using the conventional dressing. Despite this, it was the least expensive alternative.