Jan Akkan

Self‐treatment of benign symptoms using hot water bottles, steam inhalation or hot tea is common in households and poses risks of severe scald injuries. This study aims to investigate associated hazards and identify high‐risk patient groups to facilitate targeted prevention. A retrospective, single‐center descriptive study was conducted on adult burn patients with scald injuries from hot water bottles, steam inhalation or hot tea. Demographic information, injury mechanism and outcomes were analysed. A total of 43 patients (mean age: 37.5 years; female:male ratio 23:20) were included. Injuries were caused by hot water/tea (37.2%), steam (34.9%) and hot water bottles (27.9%). The average burned total body surface area (TBSA) was 4%, with 79.1% of injuries being superficial partial‐thickness burns. Surgical intervention was required in 13.9% of cases. Hot water bottle injuries predominantly affected young females (75%, mean age 32.6 years), with a high incidence of genital burns (58.3%). Hot tea‐related injuries were more frequent in older males (62.5%, mean age 41.6 years), involving greater TBSA (6.5%) and a higher necessity for skin grafting (18.8%). Common self‐treatment strategies can cause serious scalds, particularly in specific demographic groups, thereby burdening healthcare systems. Awareness of these risks is pivotal for effective education and prevention.

Introduction: Superficial partial thickness burns generally do not require surgical intervention and are managed with specialized wound dressings. Mepilex Ag^® is commonly used and often represents the standard of care. This study evaluated the clinical performance of pure silk compared to Mepilex Ag^®. Methods: A prospective, single-center intraindividual study was conducted on adult patients with superficial partial thickness burns. Each burn wound was divided, treating one half with pure silk and the other with Mepilex Ag^®. Clinical parameters including wound closure time, pain levels, and scar quality at 3-month follow-up were analyzed. Results: Twenty-four patients were included (mean TBSA: 5.8%). Mepilex Ag^® showed a trend towards a shorter wound closure time (10.5 vs. 11.5 days; p = 0.223). Pain scores remained below 4/10 for both dressings throughout treatment. However, Mepilex Ag^® demonstrated significantly lower pain on day one (3.5 vs. 2.77; p = 0.039) and day two (2.91 vs. 2.27; p = 0.041). Scar quality after 3 months was similar. Conclusion: Both dressings proved to be effective treatment options. Pure silk required fewer resources, showed high clinical practicality, and demonstrated a similar performance to Mepilex Ag^® in key clinical parameters, making it an interesting option for other clinics and our standard of care.

Following the enzymatic debridement of deep dermal burns, the choice of wound dressing is crucial for providing an adequate environment and suitable conditions for rapid wound healing. As Suprathel^® and fatty gauze (Jelonet^®) are the most commonly used dressings in burn centers, the aim of this study is to compare Suprathel^® and Jelonet^® in the treatment of deep dermal burns after enzymatic debridement with respect to wound healing, patient comfort, and pain. A total of 23 patients with deep dermal burns of the hand or foot (mean total body surface area of 4.31%) were included in this prospective, unicentric, open, comparative, and intra-individual clinical study. After enzymatic debridement, wounds were divided into two areas: one was treated with Suprathel^® and the other with Jelonet^®. Suprathel^® remained on the wounds without dressing changes while Jelonet^® was regularly changed. Wound healing, infection, bleeding, exudation, time for dressing changes, and pain were documented (from days 2 to 48) after injury. Satisfactory results were obtained in 22 cases; only one patient had to undergo a second debridement followed by skin grafting. No significant difference in time to final wound healing could be observed (18–19 d). Patients reported significantly less pain during the dressing changes for Suprathel^® compared to Jelonet^®. Furthermore, the wound areas treated with Suprathel^® showed significantly less exudation and bleeding. Wound infections rarely occurred in both groups. In conclusion, the authors found that both wound dressings could be used to achieve safe and rapid wound healing after the enzymatic debridement of deep dermal burns of the hands and feet. However, compared to Jelonet^®, Suprathel^® showed superior results in terms of patient comfort and pain reduction.