本研究目的在比較不同敷料材質應用在植皮手術病患的取皮區之成效。採類實驗研究設計，以植皮病患為研究對象，收集60位個案採自身對照法，大腿取皮區分別使用親水性纖維敷料及透明薄膜敷料作為實驗組與對照組，觀察術後第1-7、10、14、21天之傷口換藥次數、換藥時間、疼痛分數、癒合人數百分比及感染率等。研究結果顯示兩組在換藥次數無統計上顯著差異(p=.146)，在換藥時間，親水性纖維敷料比透明薄膜敷料多2.3分鐘(p<.05)；而在術後第1天，親水性纖維敷料比透明薄膜敷料的疼痛分數高(2.1v.s.0.8, p<.001)，達統計上顯著差異，術後第4天起，親水性纖維敷料疼痛分數下降的改變量比透明薄膜敷料大(p<.001)；術後第10、14、21天，親水性纖維敷料癒合人數百分比較透明薄膜敷料多(p<.001)；但兩組之感染率卻未達統計上差異(p>.05)。本研究使用兩種敷料應用於取皮區都有不同結果，使用親水性纖維敷料傷口癒合快，而使用透明薄膜敷料則比較不痛，可供臨床上選擇之參考。

The purpose of this study was to present the outcome between the use of Aquacel and Opsite on skin graft donor sites. The study was designed as a case control study, and 60 patients were recruited. Each donor site was divided into two areas which were dressed individually with Aquacel (experimental groups) and Opsite (control groups). The results showed that there was no significant difference in the frequency of dressing change. The dressing time was lesser for Opsite group compared to Aquacel group (p<.05), and Aquacel group reported higher pain level than Opsite group in the initial post-operation (post-op) day. However, the pain was relieved significantly on the 4th post-op day (p<.001). Aquacel group had shorter wound healing time (p<.001). While the infection rate was same for both (p>.05). None of the materials were optimal dressing for skin graft donor sites, but Aquacel provided more rapid wound healing on donor sites and Opsite was the least painful material. These factors can be considered by health care professionals when making a clinical choice.