Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10796254›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2000

Emollient ointment for preventing infection in preterm infants.

R F Soll, W H Edwards

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 97 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Skin care interventions in infants for preventing eczema and food allergy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Topical emollient for preventing infection in preterm infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Skin care interventions in infants for preventing eczema and food allergy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  4. Topical emollient for preventing infection in preterm infants.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  5. Microorganisms · 2019
    Review
  6. Skin care practices in newborn nurseries and mother-baby units in Maryland.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2017
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Conservative procedures in skin reconstitution.GMS current topics in otorhinolaryngology, head and neck surgery · 2005
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

R F SollDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Vermont College of Medicine, A-121 Medical Alumni Building, Burlington, Vermont 05405-0068, USA. rsoll@salus.med.uvm.edu
W H Edwards
University of Vermont · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis section is under preparation and will be included in the next issue.

objectivesTo assess the effect of prophylactic application of emollient ointment in preterm infants. SEARCH STRATEGY: Searches were made of the Oxford Database of Perinatal Trials, Medline (MeSH terms: ointment; limits: age groups, newborn infant; publication types, clinical trial), previous reviews including cross references, abstracts, conference and symposia proceedings, expert informants, and journal handsearching in the English language. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials which compared the effect of prophylactic application of emollient ointment to routine care or as needed topical therapy in preterm infants are included in this review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data regarding clinical outcomes including transepidermal water loss, skin condition, fluid intake, suspect infection and proven nosocomial infection were excerpted from the reports of the clinical trials by the reviewers. Data analysis was done in accordance with the standards of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. MAIN

resultsTwo randomized trials which compared prophylactic application of ointment to routine skin care or as needed topical ointment therapy were identified. Lane (1993) noted improved skin condition in infants receiving topical application of emollient ointment. In the study of Nopper and coworkers (1996), prophylactic application of ointment significantly decreased transepidermal water loss during the first six hours after initial application. Skin condition was noted to be improved during the first 1-2 weeks. Surveillance cultures demonstrated less bacterial colonization during the two week study. A significant decrease in suspect and proven infection was noted. Fewer infants were evaluated for sepsis among the group who received prophylactic application of ointment (relative risk 0. 50, 95% CI 0.27, 0.93; risk difference -0.30, 95% CI -0.54, -0.06). Both studies reported on the incidence of proven nosocomial infection. A trend towards a decrease in the risk of proven nosocomial infection was noted in infants who received prophylactic application of emollient ointment (typical relative risk 0.29, 95% CI 0.07, 1.16, typical risk difference -0.13, 95% CI -0.25, -0.01). REVIEWER'S

conclusionsIn two small studies, prophylactic application of emollient ointment decreased transepidermal water loss, decreased the severity of dermatitis, and decreased the risk of suspect sepsis and proven sepsis. Further clinical studies are warranted to validate these results.

Indexed as

Cross InfectionDermatitisEmollientsHumansInfant, NewbornInfant, PrematureInfant, Premature, DiseasesOintmentsEmollientsOintments

Identifiers

PMID10796254
OpenAlexW2404681272

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.