The effects of an adherent polyurethane film and conventional absorbed dressing in patients with small partial thickness burns

A randomized trial comparing polyurethane with a conventional dressing in the treatment of out-patients with small blistered burns is described. Fifty-one patients were studied and the following parameters were measured; the rate of healing, the rate of infection, and the degree of pain and social inconvenience. The patients' subjective perceptions of pain and inconvenience were derived from a questionnaire and a multi-dimensional scaling analysis was made of the data. This technique appears well suited to making clear group differences using subjective data. No difference was found in the rate of infection. The group treated by polyurethane film healed their wounds in a shorter time, this reached significance (10±5 days and 14±7 days in the conventional dressing groups, p<0.04) but most wounds in both groups had healed within 17 days. It was also demonstrated that whereas both groups showed similar responses to a wide range of painful and inconvenient conditions, the comparative rankings on both 'pain' and 'inconvenience' scales were significantly lower for the group treated with the plastic film. Problems associated with the dressing and possible reasons for the difference between the two groups are discussed.