Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

A comparison of wound healing between a skin protectant ointment and a medical device topical emulsion after laser resurfacing of the perioral area  Deborah.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "A comparison of wound healing between a skin protectant ointment and a medical device topical emulsion after laser resurfacing of the perioral area  Deborah."— Presentation transcript:

1 A comparison of wound healing between a skin protectant ointment and a medical device topical emulsion after laser resurfacing of the perioral area  Deborah S. Sarnoff, MD  Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology  Volume 64, Issue 3, Pages S36-S43 (March 2011) DOI: /j.jaad Copyright © 2010 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc. Terms and Conditions

2 Fig 1 Subjective irritation scores for AHO and BTE. A, Stinging. B, Itching. C, Tightness. D, Burning. E, Tingling. F, Pain. ∗P ≤ .05 for between-treatment comparison. Subjective irritation grading scale: 0 = none or absent, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = marked or strong, 4 = severe or extreme. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology  , S36-S43DOI: ( /j.jaad ) Copyright © 2010 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc. Terms and Conditions

3 Fig 2 Mean clinical grading scores. A, Erythema. B, Edema. C, Crusting/scabbing. D, Epithelial confluence. Erythema and edema grading scale: 0 = none, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = marked, 4 = severe. Crusting/scabbing grading scale: 0 = none, 1 = slight, 2 = moderate, 3 = extensive, 4 = almost complete or complete. Epithelial confluence grading scale: 0 = none, 1 = slight (up to 30%), 2 = moderate (31%-60%), 3 = extensive (61%-90%), 4 = almost complete (91%-100%). ∗P < .05 for comparison between treatments. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology  , S36-S43DOI: ( /j.jaad ) Copyright © 2010 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc. Terms and Conditions

4 Fig 3 Mean scores for general wound appearance. Wound appearance grading scale: 0 = poor, 1 = fair, 2 = good, 3 = very good, 4 = excellent. ∗P < .05 for comparison between treatments. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology  , S36-S43DOI: ( /j.jaad ) Copyright © 2010 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc. Terms and Conditions

5 Fig 4 Digital photography showing progression of healing. A, Subject 1. B, Subject 2. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology  , S36-S43DOI: ( /j.jaad ) Copyright © 2010 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc. Terms and Conditions

6 Fig 5 Subjects’ ranking of treatment sites. Percentage of subjects ranking one treatment above the other daily based on which site appeared better. ∗P < .05 for comparison between treatments. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology  , S36-S43DOI: ( /j.jaad ) Copyright © 2010 American Academy of Dermatology, Inc. Terms and Conditions


Download ppt "A comparison of wound healing between a skin protectant ointment and a medical device topical emulsion after laser resurfacing of the perioral area  Deborah."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google