EFFECT ON HEALING OF SKIN GRAFT DONOR SITE USING CHLORHEXIDINE PARAFFINE DRESSING VERSUS CALCIUM ALGINATE DRESSING

Abstract

Background: Optimal healing of skin graft donor sites is essential to minimize patient discomfort and complications such as infection and delayed recovery. While chlorhexidine paraffin dressings have been widely used for donor site care, calcium alginate dressings—due to their absorbent and hemostatic properties—have emerged as promising alternatives. However, limited regional data exists comparing their clinical effectiveness. This study aims to evaluate the comparative efficacy of these two dressing types in promoting healing and preventing infection at skin graft donor sites.

Objective: To compare the healing outcomes of skin graft donor sites treated with chlorhexidine paraffin dressing versus calcium alginate dressing.

Methods: A randomized controlled trial was conducted at the Department of Plastic Surgery, Lady Reading Hospital, Peshawar, from May 24 to November 24, 2024. A total of 80 patients aged 16 to 75 years were enrolled using consecutive non-probability sampling. Participants were randomly allocated into two equal groups of 40 using blocked randomization. Group A received chlorhexidine paraffin dressings, and Group B received calcium alginate dressings immediately post-grafting. Clinical assessments were performed on day five and subsequent outpatient visits until complete re-epithelialization. Primary outcomes included healing duration and presence of clinical infection. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 22 with significance set at p ≤ 0.05.

Results: The mean healing time in the calcium alginate group was significantly shorter (8.83 ± 1.551 days) than in the chlorhexidine paraffin group (10.75 ± 1.864 days), with a p-value of 0.0001. Clinical infection was reported in 1 patient (2.5%) in the calcium alginate group compared to 7 patients (17.5%) in the chlorhexidine paraffin group, which was statistically significant (p = 0.02).

Conclusion: Calcium alginate dressing demonstrated superior outcomes in reducing healing duration and infection rates at skin graft donor sites, indicating its potential for routine clinical application.