|
|||||||
| Emergency Medicine Emergency Medicine discussion forum | RSS: |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Junior Member
|
SDN Members don't see this ad. (About Ads)
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
banana bag in hand
|
There is an amazing lack of useful research on this subject. Most of the studies that I have seen have either been put togethor poorly or failed to show statistical signifigance. There was a study in the American Journal of EM in 2004 out of Metrohealth that seemed to indicate a lower total rate of infection but alas their results were not statistically signifigant aka. not enough power to the study (under 100 patients). Anyway, I have heard people go either way with it. Possibly a good research study for an enterprising resident?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Junior Member
|
similar to ^
i looked up this article for a journal club deal. nothing about improved wound healing times, but does indicate fewer infections with neosporin and bacitracin compared to vaseline. again, pretty low powered study Dire DJ, Coppola M, Dwyer DA, Lorette JL, Karr JL. Prospective evaluation of topical antibiotics for preventing infections in uncomplicated soft-tissue wounds repaired in the ED. Acad Emerg Med 1995; 2:4-10. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Northeast
Posts: 172
|
While in derm clinic I remember the attending saying that many people will actually develop an allergy to bacitracin -- making me think that it will have little if not deleterious effects in a wound with a low likelihood of infxn in the 1st place.
---but what do I know? |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:00 AM.









Linear Mode

