Conventional Occlusive Dressing versus Polythene Gloving on Second-Degree Burned Hands

Burns are the most devastating injuries that can occur. The location of burn influence healing asburns to face, neck, hands and feet. Regarding hands, its represent a small wound area, although amajor potential for disabilities as stiffness and contracture. The aim of burned hand treatment is toachieve healing in shortest possible time without producing disabilities. However burned hand canbe treated with occlusive dressing, but it may associate with finger stiffness after prolongedimmobilization. There are other methods can be used; the non-occlusive dressing as plastic bag orglove, they have the advantages of ease to use, allow ability to observe the hand, providing a goodhealing environment with good wound healing. Objective: Compare the effectiveness of twodressing techniques, conventional occlusive dressing versus polythene gloving on second degreeburned hands. Setting: The study was carried out at the burn unit of the main university hospital inAlexandria. Subjects: A convenient sample of 40 patients admitted to burn unit suffering fromsecond-degree burned hands was included in this study. The subjects were selected according tothe following criteria: adult of both sexes, able and willing to cooperate and communicate, newlyadmitted with recent burns. Patient with co-morbid disease, associated trauma, escharatomy wasexcluded from this study. Forty patients that included in the study were divided randomly into twogroups of equal size (20 patients, each). The first 20 patients were managed by conventionalocclusive dressings. The second 20 patients were managed by polythene gloving. Tools: Two toolswere used for data collection. The first tool (Burn Patients Assessment and Follow-Up Sheet)comprised three parts (1) Biosociodemographic data, (2) Burn wound assessment, (3)Bacteriological studies. Tool two the Burned Hands Daily Living Activities (DLAs) ObservationChecklist including 8 items.. Results: In the present study (70%, 80%) were workers respectively inconventional occlusive and polythene gloves groups. The results of this study found no statisticallysignificant differences between conventional occlusive and polythene gloving techniques regardingthe wound healing process (granulation and epithelialization) and infection rate. However,polythene gloving was painless, less time consuming, low cost and allowing for daily livingactivities as compared with conventional occlusive technique. Conclusion: The results of this studydenotes that using polythene gloving is more quick, painless, less time consuming and allowed fordaily living activity (DLAs) which promote in dependency in patient with burned hands.Recommendations: Studies effect of polythene gloves dressing on second degree burnedhands/hand at outpatient and on 3rd degree burned hand.