Burn cost-effectiveness of therapy: Difference between revisions
EmanAlademi (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Hudakarman (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ | ||
{{Burn}} | {{Burn}} | ||
{{CMG}}; {{AE}} {{EAM}} | |||
==Overview== | |||
==Burn cost-effectiveness of therapy== | ==Burn cost-effectiveness of therapy== | ||
Latest revision as of 09:35, 15 January 2021
|
Burn Microchapters |
|
Diagnosis |
|---|
|
Treatment |
|
Case Studies |
|
Burn cost-effectiveness of therapy On the Web |
|
American Roentgen Ray Society Images of Burn cost-effectiveness of therapy |
|
Risk calculators and risk factors for Burn cost-effectiveness of therapy |
Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: Eman Alademi, M.D.[2]
Overview
Burn cost-effectiveness of therapy
In patients treated with Aloe Vera gel, healing of burn wounds were remarkably early than those patients treated with 1% silver sulfadiazine. All the patients of Aloe Vera group were relieved of pain earlier than those patients who were treated with SSD[1].
Laser Doppler imaging improved therapeutic decisions. It resulted in a shorter wound healing time in the subgroup of admitted patients requiring surgery and has the potential for cost savings of €875 per scanned patient[2].
References
- ↑ Shahzad MN, Ahmed N (2013). "Effectiveness of Aloe Vera gel compared with 1% silver sulphadiazine cream as burn wound dressing in second degree burns". J Pak Med Assoc. 63 (2): 225–30. PMID 23894900.
- ↑ Hop MJ, Stekelenburg CM, Hiddingh J, Kuipers HC, Middelkoop E, Nieuwenhuis MK; et al. (2016). "Cost-Effectiveness of Laser Doppler Imaging in Burn Care in The Netherlands: A Randomized Controlled Trial". Plast Reconstr Surg. 137 (1): 166e–176e. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000001900. PMID 26710049.