ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT06304272Updated Mar 12, 2024

Comparison Between Drinking Water and Normal Saline in Irrigating Traumatic Wound

An interventional study of Irrigating Traumatic Wound with Drinking Water in Trauma, sponsored by Patan Academy of Health Sciences. Not yet recruiting. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-03-12.

Sponsored by Patan Academy of Health Sciences · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
440
Allocation
Randomized
Sex
All
01

Study summary

There is a controversy regarding the roles of the Normal saline and Tap water in irrigation of the wound. It has been suggested that antiseptic solution including normal saline has cytotoxic effect while tap water damages the fibroblast. There are no high level evidence to support one type of solution over other, systematic review have found no difference in wound infection between irrigation with normal saline vs tap water. There are ten randomized controlled trial comparing tap water with normal saline for irrigating wound published between 1992 to 2016. These RCT are analyzed in three systemic review and meta-analysis published on 2016, 2019, 2022, which showed that tap water and normal saline has no difference in terms of infection rate. The infection rate observed in various studies ranges from 0-11.5% in normal saline group and 0-12.6% in tap water group with no statistically significant difference.

Read the detailed description

There is a controversy regarding the roles of the Normal saline and Tap water in irrigation of the wound. It has been suggested that antiseptic solution including normal saline has cytotoxic effect while tap water damages the fibroblast. There are no high level evidence to support one type of solution over other, systematic review have found no difference in wound infection between irrigation with normal saline vs tap water. There are ten randomized controlled trial comparing tap water with normal saline for irrigating wound published between 1992 to 2016. These RCT are analyzed in three systemic review and meta-analysis published on 2016, 2019, 2022, which showed that tap water and normal saline has no difference in terms of infection rate. The infection rate observed in various studies ranges from 0-11.5% in normal saline group and 0-12.6% in tap water group with no statistically significant difference.

The published study has looked into tap water which may not be equivalent to drinking water in our setup, therefore the investigators are looking into drinking water that is bacteriologically safe. Out of published RCTs there is only one done in acute traumatic wound with good sample size and study design. This study is purposed to look into acute traumatic wound with proper randomization, allocation and concealment. Moreover, this is a non-inferiority trial, therefore if it is proven that drinking water is non-inferior to normal saline then, it will be easily available modality of wound irrigation in Low-Middle-Income country like Nepal.

02

Conditions studied

  • Trauma

Keywords

  • Traumatic Wound
  • Wound Infection
03

In context

Wounds and Injuries

2,217 studies on the registry are indexed under Wounds and Injuries; 441 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 440 is above the median of 70 across 1,424 interventional studies indexed under Wounds and Injuries.

Browse Wounds and Injuries studies →

Lead sponsor

Patan Academy of Health Sciences is the lead sponsor of 7 studies on the registry; 4 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Child (0–17), Adult (18–64), Older adult (65+)
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Laceration wound presenting within 6 hours of duration
  • Lacerations involving upper and lower limbs, scalps, head and neck

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Lacerations involving, lips, ears, mucosal surface, perineal and peri anal region
  • Punctured or penetrating wound
  • Bite wounds by human or animals or snakes
  • Dirty wound requiring surgical debridement
  • Patient requiring irrigation of wound with more than 1 liter of fluid
  • Wounds involving tendon, joint or bone
  • Wound associated with open fracture
  • Patient on , antibiotics or
  • Patient who are not able to come for follow-up
  • Immunocompromised patient
  • Patient with history of significant peripheral vascular disease
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(2)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Corticosteroids (steroids)

Anti-inflammatory medicines such as prednisone, prednisolone and dexamethasone — not the anabolic steroids used for muscle.

Studies differ in what they allow: check which steroid medicines, routes (tablets, injections, creams, inhalers, eye drops) and doses this study accepts.

Immunosuppression

A weakened immune system. It can come from an illness, such as HIV or some blood cancers, or from medicines that turn the immune system down, for example after an organ transplant or for an autoimmune disease; steroids at higher doses count.

Read whether the line is about a condition or about medicines, and which medicines and doses it means.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double (Participant, Care provider)
Enrollment
440 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Irrigating Traumatic Wound with Drinking Water

    In drinking water arm, acute traumatic wound will be cleaned with drinking water. Bacteriological safety of the drinking water will be ensured by testing water.

    Procedure: Irrigating Traumatic Wound with Drinking Water

  • Experimental
    Irrigating Traumatic Wound with Normal Saline

    In normal saline arm, acute traumatic wound will be cleaned with normal saline.

    Procedure: Irrigating Traumatic Wound with Drinking Water

Interventions

  • ProcedureIrrigating Traumatic Wound with Drinking Water

    Irrigating Traumatic Wound with Drinking Water and Normal Saline

    Also known as: Irrigating Traumatic Wound with Normal Saline

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Comparison between drinking water and normal saline in irrigating traumatic wound: Noninferiority trial.

    Difference in wound infection rates between the two randomized groups. Wound evaluation was based on the following criteria No infection: 1. No discharge or fever on day 3 2. Dry and no fever on day 7 Infection 1. Fever greater than 1000 F or pus discharge on any day 2. Erythema with serous discharge on any day

    Time frame: 3-7 Days

07

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

08

References and documents

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Start is estimated for Mar 2024; primary completion for Sep 2026, 30 months later.

Of 546 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Wounds and Injuries, half reached primary completion within 24 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 9 and three quarters within 49. This study's planned 30 months is above that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 599 studies reached it within 24 months; a quarter within 9 and three quarters within 48.

Wounds and Injuries covers many different conditions, not one, so the studies compared here vary widely. Read these figures as a rough guide.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Feb 20, 2024
First posted
Mar 12, 2024
StartEst.
Mar 2024
Primary completionEst.
Sep 2026
CompletionEst.
Dec 2027
Last update
Mar 12, 2024
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Mar 12, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06304272
Lead sponsor
Patan Academy of Health Sciences
Responsible party
Ashis Shrestha (Assistant Professor, Patan Academy of Health Sciences) — Principal investigator
First posted
Mar 12, 2024
Start date
Mar 2024 (estimated)
Primary completion
Sep 2026 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 2027 (estimated)
Last update
Mar 12, 2024

Study contacts

Ashis Shrestha, Fellow
Contact
ashisshrestha@pahs.edu.np
9851061846
Sumana Bajracharya, Fellow
Contact
sumanabajracharya@pahs.edu.np
9841359823
Ashis Shrestha, Fellow
principal investigator · Patan Academy of Health Sciences

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Mar 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion