Objective: Acute laceration wound (ALW) is one of the most common injuries in Indonesia with potential significant morbidities. In rural areas, povidone-iodine and honey are commonly used as wound dressings. This study aimed to identify the effectiveness of honey compared to paraffin gauze and the commonly used povidone-iodine in improving ALW healing time. Method: This study was a single-blind, pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) with three intervention groups (honey, povidone-iodine, and paraffin). The outcomes were wound healing time, slow healing, secondary healing, signs of infection, wound dehiscence, oedema, maceration, necrosis, exudate and cost. Results: A total of 35 patients (male to female ratio: 4:1), with a mean age of 22.5 (range: 6–47) years, were included and randomised to treatment groups using predetermined randomisation according to wound location and wound dressing selection: honey group, n=12; povidone-iodine group, n=11; paraffin group, n=12 with one patient lost to follow-up. All groups achieved timely healing, with a mean healing time of 9.45±5.31 days and 11.09±5.14 days for the povidone-iodine and paraffin groups, respectively, and a median healing time of 10 (3–19) days for the honey group (p>0.05). More wounds in the honey group achieved healing in ≤10 days compared with the other groups. Both povidone-iodine and honey groups had fewer adverse events, with the latter having the lowest cost. Conclusion: In this study, honey was clinically effective in accelerating healing time with a lower cost compared to paraffin, and was comparable to povidone-iodine. Future RCTs with a larger sample size should be pursued to determine honey's role in ALW treatment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Suryadinata et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: