‍Comparison of efficacy of Silversulfadiazine topical cream containing Epidermal growth factor (EGF) and Silversulfadiazine topical cream without Epidermal growth factor (EGF) on burn wounds healing (type II).

Main goal of this study is to assess the efficacy of Epidermal Growth Factor on burn wounds grade II in comparison with standard treatment. The objectives are comparison of wound healing rate, evaluation of dermis and epidermis thickness to compare the quality of healing and comparison of wound dimensions after treatment.

A clinical trial is performed with the control group, parallel groups, double-blind, randomized, on 35 patients with two samples (wounds on body parts).

Participants receive a package containing creams. They receive the same prescription for both creams.They will use cream with label number one for area one and cream with label number 2 for area 2. Both areas are cleansed every 12 hours with normal saline, the control area is treated with topical silver sulfadiazine cream and is covered with sterile gauze. For the intervention group, 1% silver sulfadiazine topical cream containing epidermal growth factor is used and is covered with sterile gas.

Admission requirements: Age 18-60 years; second-degree burns, bilateral, on both hands or feet, etc.; willingness to participate in the study. Exclusion criteria: Any underlying diseases that interfere with wound healing, such as chronic kidney disease, diabetes, liver disease, and any immunodeficiency disease or smoking; having any type of cancer or history of cancer; any allergy to recombinant epidermal growth factor, silver sulfadiazine or any substance in the formulation.

Two burn areas per person are randomly assigned to zones 1 or 2, and each area will receive one treatment (silver sulfadiazine cream for the control area and silver sulfadiazine cream containing EGF for the intervention area).

Wound size; Epidermis thickness; Dermis thickness; Speed ​​of wound healing

Two areas of each participant's burn site are randomly assigned as area one and area two. Since the study is double blind the physician chooses the burn areas by simple randomization.The creams of the intervention group and the control group are prepared by one of the project partners for each person and are given to the patient as one and two, to use cream one in area one and cream two in area two.

The coding is done by the project epidemiologist. The doctor receives the creams labeled with numbers 1 or 2, and by simple randomization, considers one area as area one, and prescribes cream number one, and considers the other area as area number 2 and prescribes cream number two. The doctor gives the patient additional information on how to use the creams. The patient also receives labeled creams that are similar in color and texture. The method of using both creams is the same, only for area one, cream number one and for area number 2, cream number 2 is used. The evaluator who evaluates the burn site at the beginning of the study and then at the end of the first, second, third and fourth weeks and collects the data also is not aware of coding system. The doctor, the evaluator and the patient are blind. The patient receives the coded drug (intervention or control). The data analyzer who drafts the article knows is aware of the coding.

Privacy control

Study Protocol, clinical trial report, codes used in the analysis, study dictionary

Six months after publishing the results

Public

Sending an email to the person in charge of updating the results

Sending an email to the person in charge of updating the results

Receiving request email by the responsible person, assessing the request and sending the required data