Nonmedicated superabsorbent polymer pad versus standard cotton Gamgee pad in partial-thickness burns: A comparative study at a tertiary care center
Sunil Sharma, R. Chandan Kumar, Piyush K. Thayal, Prashant BahiraniContext:
Burn wound dressings should provide effective exudate management, pain relief, and faster healing. Conventional Gamgee pads are limited by poor absorption and adherence, while superabsorbent polymer (SAP) dressings may offer superior outcomes.
Aims:
The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy of SAP pads with Gamgee pads in partial-thickness thermal burns.
Settings and Design:
Prospective, intrapatient comparative study at a tertiary care burns center in New Delhi (February 2020–September 2022).
Subjects and Methods:
Fifty patients (18–60 years, 15%–40% total body surface area, only superficial partial-thickness, and mid-dermal burns) were enrolled; 40 completed the study. Each patient received silver sulfadiazine and Vaseline gauze, followed by SAP pad on one site and Gamgee pad on a comparable site. Dressings were changed biweekly for 21 days. Parameters assessed: absorption, adherence, pain (Visual Analog Scale [VAS]), epithelialization, granulation, exudate control, and ease of application.
Statistical Analysis Used:
Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 21. Student’s t-test and Chi-square test were used. A
Results:
SAP pads absorbed 4–6 times their dry weight versus 1.5 times for Gamgee. Pain scores were lower with SAP (VAS 4.80 ± 1.02) compared to Gamgee (6.77 ± 1.10;
Conclusions:
The nonmedicated SAP pad showed superior absorption, faster epithelialization, and better comfort compared to the standard cotton Gamgee pad in partial-thickness burns. It also reduced dressing frequency and nursing time, indicating potential cost-effectiveness in high-volume burn care.