A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF TWO DRESSING MATERIALS (PARAFFIN GAUZE VS. POVIDONE-IODINE FOAM) FOR DONOR SITES IN SPLIT-THICKNESS SKIN GRAFTS: EVALUATION OF

Abstract

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of paraffin gauze and povidone-iodine foam dressings for donor-site management following split-thickness skin grafting in terms of reepithelialization and pain.

Methods: This randomized controlled trial was conducted at the Department of Plastic Surgery, Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto Institute of Trauma, Karachi. A total of 82 patients aged 18–75 years undergoing split-thickness skin grafting were randomized into paraffin gauze (n=41) and povidone-iodine foam (n=41) groups. Donor sites were assessed for complete reepithelialization, time to wound healing, pain using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and wound-related complications over a 14-day follow-up period. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 22, and a p-value ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: The mean age of participants was 42.8 ± 13.4 years, and 64.6% were male. The mean time to complete reepithelialization was significantly shorter in the povidone-iodine foam group than in the paraffin gauze group (11.93 ± 2.48 vs. 14.68 ± 3.11 days; p<0.001). Complete reepithelialization by day 14 was achieved in 90.2% and 70.7% of patients, respectively (p=0.025). Pain scores were significantly lower in the povidone-iodine foam group throughout follow-up (p<0.001). No donor-site infections were observed. Mild inflammatory signs occurred in 14.6% of patients receiving povidone-iodine foam and 22.0% receiving paraffin gauze (p=0.384).

Conclusion: Povidone-iodine foam dressing provided faster healing, higher rates of complete reepithelialization, and lower pain scores than paraffin gauze, making it a more effective option for donor-site management following split-thickness skin grafting.