Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://dora.health.qld.gov.au/qldresearchjspui/handle/1/2778
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSimons, M.en
dc.contributor.authorTyack, Z.en
dc.contributor.authorWare, R. S.en
dc.contributor.authorWiseman, J.en
dc.contributor.authorMcPhail, S. M.en
dc.contributor.authorKimble, R.en
dc.date.accessioned2022-11-07T23:35:07Z-
dc.date.available2022-11-07T23:35:07Z-
dc.date.issued2021en
dc.identifier.citation35, (8), 2021, p. 1126-1141en
dc.identifier.otherRISen
dc.identifier.urihttp://dora.health.qld.gov.au/qldresearchjspui/handle/1/2778-
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: The longer-term effectiveness of silicone and pressure burn scar interventions was evaluated at 12-months postburn. DESIGN: Parallel group, randomised trial. SETTING: Hospital outpatient clinics, research centre. PARTICIPANTS: Children referred for burn scar management following grafted or spontaneously healed acute burn injuries or scar reconstruction surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised to: (1) topical silicone gel only, (2) pressure garment only, or (3) combined topical silicone gel and pressure garment. MAIN MEASURES: Primary outcomes were scar thickness (blinded ultrasound measurement) and itch intensity (caregiver proxy-report, numeric rating scale). RESULTS: Of 153 participants randomised who received the interventions (silicone n = 51, pressure garment n = 49, combined n = 53), 86 were followed-up at 12-months postburn (n = 34, n = 28, n = 24). No differences were identified for the primary outcomes using intention-to-treat analysis. Scar thickness mean difference (95% confidence interval) = 0.00 cm (-0.04, 0.05); -0.03 cm (-0.07, 0.02); 0.03 cm (-0.02, 0.08) and scar itch = 0.09 (-0.88, 1.06); -0.21 (-1.21, 0.79); 0.30 (-0.73, 1.32) for silicone vs pressure; silicone vs combined and combined vs pressure respectively. No serious adverse effects occurred. CONCLUSION: Similar to short-term results, the combined intervention offered no statistically or clinically significant benefit for improving the primary outcomes compared to each intervention alone. No differences in the primary outcomes were identified between the silicone and pressure alone groups.L6352897752021-06-21 <br />2021-08-16 <br />en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.relation.ispartofClinical rehabilitationen
dc.titleEffectiveness of topical silicone gel and pressure garment therapy for burn scar prevention and management in children 12-months postburn: A parallel group randomised controlled trialen
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/02692155211020351en
dc.subject.keywordscontrolled studyen
dc.subject.keywordsechographyen
dc.subject.keywordshumanen
dc.subject.keywordshypertrophic scaren
dc.subject.keywordsmaleen
dc.subject.keywordschilden
dc.subject.keywordsrandomized controlled trialen
dc.subject.keywordssilicone gelburnen
dc.subject.keywordspreschool childen
dc.subject.keywordsclothingen
dc.subject.keywordscomplicationen
dc.subject.keywordscompression bandageen
dc.relation.urlhttps://www.embase.com/search/results?subaction=viewrecord&id=L635289775&from=exporthttp://dx.doi.org/10.1177/02692155211020351 |en
dc.identifier.risid1823en
dc.description.pages1126-1141en
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.openairetypeArticle-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
Appears in Sites:Children's Health Queensland Publications
Queensland Health Publications
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

126
checked on May 8, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DORA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.