An Update on Post‐Surgical Wound Healing Management and Lower‐Cost Alternatives: A Narrative Review for Healthcare Providers

ABSTRACT Background and Aims Wound care is a critical component of postoperative and chronic disease management, yet rising supply costs, inconsistent insurance coverage, and patient‐level barriers can complicate care in outpatient and home settings. This narrative review summarizes wound‐management principles and evaluates lower‐cost alternatives, emphasizing differences in evidence strength, appropriate wound contact, contraindications, and required clinical oversight. Methods A narrative review of English‐language literature available through July 2026 was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, and reference‐list review. Evidence from guidelines, systematic reviews, meta‐analyses, randomized trials, and clinical studies was prioritized. Evidence supporting each lower‐cost strategy was categorized qualitatively by study design and directness. Results Evidence was strongest for potable tap‐water cleansing in selected wounds, plain petrolatum for selected clean postprocedural wounds, and paper tape for selected closed incisions. Nonmedical absorbent products have a limited role as external secondary protection and should not contact open wound beds. Clinician‐assembled negative‐pressure wound therapy and nonmedical compression require trained selection and monitoring. Raw honey, direct application of essential oils, and unsupervised homemade wound solutions are not recommended. Conclusion Certain lower‐cost wound care products may expand access to care for patients facing financial or logistical barriers. However, these alternative products should preserve the same safety threshold as conventional care and should be selected according to wound type, depth, exudate, perfusion, infection status, and treatment goal. Further comparative research is needed to establish the effectiveness, safety, and cost savings of alternative wound care strategies.