Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11405957›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2001

Compression for venous leg ulcers.

N Cullum, E A Nelson, A W Fletcher, T A Sheldon

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Compression therapy for treating post-thrombotic syndrome.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Guidelines for managing the leg ulcer.Indian dermatology online journal · 2014
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

N CullumCentre for Evidence Based Nursing, Department of Health Studies, University of York, Genesis 6, York Science Park, York, UK, YO10 5DQ. nac2@york.ac.uk
E A Nelson
A W Fletcher
T A Sheldon

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of compression bandaging and stockings in the treatment of venous leg ulcers. SEARCH STRATEGY: Searches of 19 databases, hand searching of journals, conference proceedings and bibliographies. Manufacturers of compression bandages and stockings and an Advisory Panel were contacted for unpublished studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials that evaluated compression bandaging or stockings, as a treatment for venous leg ulcers. There was no restriction on date or language. Ulcer healing was the primary endpoint. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Details of eligible studies were extracted and summarised using a data extraction sheet. Data extraction was verified by two reviewers independently. MAIN

resultsTwenty two trials reporting 24 comparisons were identified. Compression was more effective than no compression (4/6 trials). When multi-layered systems were compared, elastic compression was more effective than non-elastic compression (5 trials). There was no difference in healing rates between 4-layer bandaging and other high compression multi-layered systems (3 trials). There was no difference in healing rates between elastomeric multi-layered systems (4 trials). Multi-layered high compression was more effective than single layer compression (4 trials). Compression stockings were evaluated in two trials. One found a high compression stocking plus a thrombo stocking to be more effective than a short stretch bandage. The second small trial reported no difference between the compression stockings and Unna's boot. There were insufficient data to draw conclusions about the relative cost-effectiveness of different regimens. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsCompression increases ulcer healing rates compared with no compression. Multi-layered systems are more effective than single-layered systems. High compression is more effective than low compression but there are no clear differences in the effectiveness of different types of high compression.

Indexed as

BandagesControlled Clinical Trials as TopicCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansLeg UlcerRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID11405957

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.