Randomized trial shows fast-absorbing collagen sutures reduce parental anxiety and improve quality of life compared to nylon sutures.
Objective To assess the psychological status and quality of life improvements in parents of children undergoing facial trauma repair emphasizing cosmetic outcomes with fast-absorbing collagen sutures, and to compare these outcomes with those in parents of children repaired with nylon sutures. A secondary objective was to compare scar outcomes between the two suture materials. Methods From January 2024 to October 2024, 120 primary caregivers (defined as the parent providing ≥80% of daily wound care) of pediatric facial trauma patients were randomized into an observation group ( n = 60, 7-0 fast-absorbing collagen sutures, non-removal) or a control group ( n = 60, 7-0 nylon sutures, removed on day 7). Psychological assessments included the Self-Rating Anxiety Scale (SAS), Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS), and Generic Quality of Life Inventory-74 (GQOLI-74). Scar formation was evaluated using the Scar Cosmesis Assessment and Rating (SCAR) scale at 1 month postoperatively. Results Baseline SAS/SDS scores and GQOLI-74 domain scores showed no intergroup differences ( P > 0.05). Post-intervention, both groups exhibited reduced anxiety (ΔSAS: −12.3 ± 2.1 vs. −8.7 ± 1.8) and depression (ΔSDS: −10.9 ± 1.9 vs. −6.4 ± 1.5), with superior reductions in the observation group ( P < 0.05). GQOLI-74 scores improved significantly in the observation group across all domains (psychological: 82.4 ± 5.3 vs. 75.1 ± 4.8; social: 79.6 ± 4.7 vs. 71.2 ± 4.1; P < 0.05). SCAR scores showed no significant differences between groups (3.07 ± 1.78 vs. 3.23 ± 1.64, P > 0.05). Conclusion Fast-absorbing collagen sutures significantly alleviate parental anxiety/depression and improve family quality of life without compromising scar outcomes compared to nylon sutures. The non-removal protocol simplifies postoperative care, highlighting the importance of integrating caregiver psychological well-being into suture material selection.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xie et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: