  | |||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
| Journal Home | |
| Current Issue | |
| AOP | |
| Archive | |
| |
| |
THIS ARTICLE  | |
| |
| Download PDF | |
| References | |
| |
| |
| |
| Export citation | |
| Export references | |
| |
| |
| |
| Send to a friend | |
| |
| |
| |
| More articles like this | |
| |
| |
| |
| Table of Contents | |
| < Previous | Next > | |
| |
 |
 |
| Nature 200, 377 - 378 (26 October 1963); doi:10.1038/200377a0 |
|
Effect of Air Exposure and Occlusion on Experimental Human Skin Wounds
CAMERON D. HINMAN & HOWARD MAIBACH
Division of Dermatology, University of California School of Medicine, San Francisco.
THE benefits of special dressings versus air exposure of cutaneous wounds has long been debated. Winter and Scales1,2 have recently added fresh insight into the problem. In the domestic pig they demonstrated that an occlusive dressing doubles the rate of wound re-epithelization when compared with wounds exposed to the air. In this communication we report parallel studies performed in man.
- Winter, G. D. , Nature, 193, 293 (1962). | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
- Winter, G. D. , and Scales, J. T. , Nature, 197, 91 (1963). | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |
© 1963 Nature Publishing Group
Privacy Policy