The ability to scale-up the sonochemical coating of medical textiles with antibacterial nanoparticles is demonstrated in the current paper. A roll-to-roll pilot installation to coat textiles was built taking into consideration the requirements of the sonochemical process. A long-run experiment was conducted in which 2500 m of fabric were coated with antibacterial ZnO nanoparticles (NPs). The metal oxide NPs were deposited from an ethanol:water solution. In this continuous process a uniform concentration of coated NPs over the length/width of the fabric was achieved. The antibacterial efficiency of the sonochemically-coated textiles was validated in a hospital environment by a reduction in the occurrence of nosocomial infections. NP-coated bed sheets, patient gowns, pillow cover, and bed covers were used by 21 patients. For comparison 16 patients used regular textiles. The clinical data indicated the reduced occurrence of hospital-acquired infections when using the metal oxide NP-coated textiles. In order to reduce the cost of the coating process and considering safety issues during manufacturing, the solvent (ethanol:water) (9:1 v:v) used for the long-run experiment, was replaced by water. Although lesser amounts of ZnO NPs were deposited on the fabric in the water-based process the antibacterial activity of the textiles was preserved due to the smaller size of the particles.

The study comprises 27 operated patients with similar burns. Fifteen donor sites treated with Acticoat (Smith & Nephew) and 12 donor sites treated with Allevyn (Smith & Nephew) have been analyzed with respect to epithelization time, antibacterial effect, ease of dressing change, pain, and pharmacologic and cost-effective characteristics. All donor sites after the reepithelization were evaluated using the Vancouver Scar Scale for the assessment of scars at the fourth, eighth, and 12th weeks. The obtained results demonstrate statistically significant faster epithelization (P = 0.012 on the eighth day and P = 0.0081 on the 10th day) and better comfort for the patient with the Acticoat dressing (P < 0.05). With regard to bacterial growth (P > 0.05) there is no statistically significant difference in the application of Acticoat and Allevyn. The Vancouver Scar Scale assessment shows no statistically significant difference (P > 0.05) in the application of both Acticoat and Allevyn. There is no considerable difference in the cost of treatment between both dressings. The results obtained determine both dressings as suitable for application on donor sites. If there is a possibility of choice, the Acticoat dressing is preferable.