title: Evidence-based emergency medicine: clinical synopsis. No clear winner among dressings for partial-thickness burns.
abstract: METHODS
  The authors searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialized Register (May 29, 2008), MEDLINE (1950 to May 2008), EMBASE (1980 to May 2008), and CINAHL (1982 to May 2008).
  
  
  METHODS
  The review included randomized controlled trials examining various burn dressings, frequently using silver sulfadiazine as a control. Dressing types included the following: Studies addressing topical skin agents, full-thickness burns, hand burns, and biological skin replacements were excluded. The primary outcomes included time to complete wound healing and change in wound surface area over time. Secondary outcomes included number of dressing changes, pain, patient satisfaction, infection rate, need for surgery, cost, and hospital length of stay.
  
  
  METHODS
  Studies were reviewed by 2 authors independently and data were abstracted using standardized forms. The authors abstracted and pooled data from eligible studies by using appropriate analytical methods according to the Cochrane Handbook, version 5.0.0. Studies were assessed for the adequacy of randomization and allocation concealment, blinding of providers and participants, potential selection bias after allocation, and completeness of follow-up.
authors.affiliation: Grand Rapids Medical Education Partners/Division of Emergency Medicine, Michigan State University, Grand Rapids, MI, USA.
authors.forename: J Adam
authors.initials: JA
authors.lastname: Oostema
authors.forename: Dale J
authors.initials: DJ
authors.lastname: Ray