Investigation of Non-analgesic Subcutaneous Suture and Skin Bond in Patients with Deep Facial Lacerations

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of non-analgesic subcutaneous suture with an adhesive agent. METHODS: We sutured lacerated wounds with an adhesive agent using a non-analgesic method and measured pain and patient satisfaction. We classified three steps (I: entering the needle, II: pulling the fiber, III: tying) in the suture sequence and evaluated the pain (painfulness, tolerance, painlessness) for each step. RESULTS: Of 276 patients admitted within the period, 111 were enrolled in this study. The mean wound characteristics were 11+/-4 mm (depth) and 23+/-18 mm (length). Overall, 83(75%) patients were sutured without additional analgesics. On a pain scale, all steps were measured at over 90% with respect to tolerance and painlessness. In step II, tolerance (63%) and painfulness (10%) was higher than in the other steps (p<0.05). The mean rate of satisfaction was 4.7 (group 1, 4.8; group 2, 4.6; group, 3; 4.6, group 4, 4.7 (p=0.673). CONCLUSION: Non-analgesic subcutaneous suture with adhesive agent was very effective for patients who were admitted to the emergency department with deep facial lacerations with a length of no more than 2 cm.

Comparison between Tissue Adhesive and Suture by Using Modified Hollander Score for Facial Wounds Treated in the Emergency Department

PURPOSE: The object of this study is to compare the patient satisfaction in the view of scarring, cost, and hospital stay between the conventional suture method and a method using Histoacryl(R) (2-N-butylcyanoacrylate) adhesive for treating facial lacerations in the emergency department. METHODS: This study is a randomized prospective trial, which was conducted from December 2009 to January 2010. The participants include 109 patients who visited the emergency room in Deajon Eulji Medical Center. The ages ranged from 1 to 59 (mean age of 18.7), and all had facial lacerations of less than 3 cm. In order to treat the facial lacerations, an emergency medicine doctor used tissue adhesive (2-N-butylcyanoacrylate, Histoacryl(R)) for 41 patients in the experimental group, and a plastic surgeon performed conventional suturing for 68 patients in the control group. The ER-stay and the primary treatment fee were compared in the two groups, and the scarring was evaluated 10 to 11 months from suturing by using the Modified Hollander Method and the 10-cm scaled VAS (visual analogue scale: score 0=no scar, score 10=very severe scar). RESULTS: The ER stay was 76 minutes for the experimental group and 107 minutes for the control group, showing that statistically significantly less time of 31 minutes was taken in the experimental group. The cost of the experimental group was 40000 won (50.1%) more expensive than the control group, with an average cost of 121900 won for the experimental group and 81200 won for the control group. As for scar evaluation, 10.56 months after suturing, the experimental group showed a better result with a score of 2.6 compared to a score of 3.4 in the control group; however, this difference was not statistically significant (p<0.05). As to a detailed evaluation of scar characteristics, the experimental group had a statistically significantly better result in scar elevation, with a score of 0.6 compared to a score of 1.65 for the control group. CONCLUSION: If appropriate patients are selected, the method using tissue adhesive directly applied by an EM doctor not only decreases ER stay but also creates similar patients satisfaction, with statistically better result in scar elevation, compared to the conventional suture method; thus, ultimately general patient satisfaction is increased.

Comparison between Tissue Adhesive and Suture by Using Modified Hollander Score for Facial Wounds Treated in the Emergency Department

PURPOSE: The object of this study is to compare the patient satisfaction in the view of scarring, cost, and hospital stay between the conventional suture method and a method using Histoacryl(R) (2-N-butylcyanoacrylate) adhesive for treating facial lacerations in the emergency department. METHODS: This study is a randomized prospective trial, which was conducted from December 2009 to January 2010. The participants include 109 patients who visited the emergency room in Deajon Eulji Medical Center. The ages ranged from 1 to 59 (mean age of 18.7), and all had facial lacerations of less than 3 cm. In order to treat the facial lacerations, an emergency medicine doctor used tissue adhesive (2-N-butylcyanoacrylate, Histoacryl(R)) for 41 patients in the experimental group, and a plastic surgeon performed conventional suturing for 68 patients in the control group. The ER-stay and the primary treatment fee were compared in the two groups, and the scarring was evaluated 10 to 11 months from suturing by using the Modified Hollander Method and the 10-cm scaled VAS (visual analogue scale: score 0=no scar, score 10=very severe scar). RESULTS: The ER stay was 76 minutes for the experimental group and 107 minutes for the control group, showing that statistically significantly less time of 31 minutes was taken in the experimental group. The cost of the experimental group was 40000 won (50.1%) more expensive than the control group, with an average cost of 121900 won for the experimental group and 81200 won for the control group. As for scar evaluation, 10.56 months after suturing, the experimental group showed a better result with a score of 2.6 compared to a score of 3.4 in the control group; however, this difference was not statistically significant (p<0.05). As to a detailed evaluation of scar characteristics, the experimental group had a statistically significantly better result in scar elevation, with a score of 0.6 compared to a score of 1.65 for the control group. CONCLUSION: If appropriate patients are selected, the method using tissue adhesive directly applied by an EM doctor not only decreases ER stay but also creates similar patients satisfaction, with statistically better result in scar elevation, compared to the conventional suture method; thus, ultimately general patient satisfaction is increased.

Clinical Evaluation of Facial Laceration Patients Who Visited Tertiary Emergency Medical Center

BACKGROUND: Facial laceration is a common clinical problem in the emergency room that is frequently associated with other craniofacial injuries. It elicits an emotional response from the patient because of the underlying concern of permanent scar and secondary facial disfigurement, so they demand prompt and adequate treatment. The aim of this study is to analyze the incidence, etiology, depth, and site of facial lacerations to provide basic data for further understanding. METHOD: This study reviewed 1,043 facial-laceration patients treated in the emergency room at Pusan Paik Hospital between March 1999 and February 2000. This retrospective study was done by reviewing and analyzing the sex and age distributions, the monthly and daily distributions, the causes of injury, the types of injury, the sites of injury, the lengths of the lacerations, and associated injuries. RESULTS: The sex ratio of men to wemen was 2.4:1, and the 0~10 age group was at the top of the age distribution. The number of patients was the highest on sundays and during March. About 9.2% of the patients visited the emergency room between 10:00 P.M. and 11:00 P.M. Falls(38.1%) were the most common cause of facial laceration, and deep laceration(51.8%) was the most common type of facial laceration. The most common laceration site was the forehead, followed by the chin and the nose. The most common associated craniofacial injury was facial bone fracture(39%). Facial-lacerations were sutured by plastic surgeons(80%), emergency physicians(10%), and oromaxillofacial surgeons(10%). We found statistical significance in the types and lengths of lacerations between men and wemen, among age groups(p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Facial laceration is one of the most common craniofacial injuries in the emergency room. By now, most lacerations have been repaired by plastic surgeons. But, the causes of lacerations are diverse and many patients are admitted due to the associated injuries. Therefore, emergency physicians should participate more aggressively in the care of facial-laceration patients to improve the outcome of the patients.