目的当今有很多局部外用产品可用于Ⅱ度烧伤创面的治疗,笔者从天然抗菌性、抗炎性及创面愈合3方面对湿润烧伤膏(MEBO)及蜂蜜进行了比较。在烧伤创面治疗中,此两种药物已被证明均优于磺胺嘧啶银。方法本实验为随机对照试验,为期6个月,研究样本均为30%TBSA以下的急性Ⅱ度烧伤患者。本试验共有34名患者被随机编入MEBO组及蜂蜜组(蜂蜜为印尼当地生产),创面每日换药1次,并给予相应处理措施。入院时评估创面深度及烧伤面积,此后2周内每周再评估1次;使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估患者疼痛水平;每周进行创面拭子分泌物培养获得创面微生物情况;同时,记录各组的每日治疗成本。结果相比于蜂蜜组,MEBO组的Ⅱ度烧伤创面愈合较快,VAS疼痛评分较低;两组在创面拭子分泌物培养的细菌类型中无差异,但MEBO在细菌繁殖方面具有更有效地抑制作用;MEBO组的全程治疗费用亦低于蜂蜜组。结论作为治疗Ⅱ度烧伤的外用药,MEBO在愈合速度,疼痛缓解程度,细菌繁殖率及成本-效益率4个方面均优于当地生产的蜂蜜。 Objectives There are many topical topical products available for the treatment of second degree burn wounds. The author compared the MEBO and honey from the aspects of natural anti-bacterial, anti-inflammatory and wound healing. In the treatment of burn wounds, both drugs have been shown to be superior to silver sulfadiazine. Methods This trial was a randomized, controlled trial of 6 months in which patients were studied for grade 2 or grade B burns below 30% TBSA. A total of 34 patients were randomly assigned to the MEBO group and the honey group (honey was locally produced in Indonesia). The wound dressing was changed 1 time per day and the corresponding treatment measures were given. The depth of the wound and the area of ​​the burn were assessed at admission and then reweighted weekly for a period of 2 weeks thereafter. The patient’s pain level was assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Weekly wound swab secretions were collected to obtain the wound microbiology. At the same time, Daily treatment costs for each group. Results Compared with the honey group, the MEBO group had a faster second-degree burn wound healing and a lower VAS pain score. There was no difference in the bacterial types cultured in wound swab secretions between the two groups, but the MEBO had a more effective Inhibition; MEBO group full cost of treatment is also lower than the honey group. Conclusions MEBO is superior to locally produced honey in terms of healing rate, degree of pain relief, rate of bacterial growth and cost-benefit ratio as an external use for the treatment of second degree burns.