4.4 Article

A prospective randomized clinical trial to investigate the effect of silicone gel sheeting (Cica-Care) on post-traumatic hypertrophic scar among the Chinese population

Journal

BURNS
Volume 32, Issue 6, Pages 678-683

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.burns.2006.01.016

Keywords

pressure therapy; hypertrophic scar; randomized clinical trial; Chinese population

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: This study aimed to determine the efficacy of silicone gel (Cica-Care) on severe post-traumatic hypertophic, scars among the Chinese population. Method and materials: A randomized clinical trial (RCT) was conducted on 45 Chinese patients with post-traumatic hypertrophic scars. Twenty-two subjects were placed in the experimental group with silicone gel sheeting (SGS) applied 24 h per day for 6 months while all subjects were taught to massage the scar daily for 15 min serving as the control intervention. Scar assessments were conducted regularly to measure the changes in thickness, pigmentation, vascularity, pliability, itchiness and pain. Results: Two-way repeated ANOVA showed a significant difference between MT group and SGS group on scar thickness. The post hoc comparison analysis showed that the difference was significant at the post-2-month (p = 0.008) and post-6-month (p < 0.001) intervention. The SGS group also showed changes in pigmentation which resembled normal skin but no statistical significance was found. Pain, itchiness and pliability were also improved after intervention. Conclusion: This study indicated that silicone get sheeting (Cica-Care) was effective to reduce thickness, pain, itchiness and pliability of the severe hypertrophic scar among the Chinese population. The moisturization effect of the tough and hard scar might contribute to the reduction of the skin thickness after 6 month's intervention. (C) 2006 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available