Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20214822›Full record

Trial reportTrials2010

Protocol for a pilot randomised controlled clinical trial to compare the effectiveness of a graduated three layer straight tubular bandaging system when compared to a standard short stretch compression bandaging system in the management of people with venous ulceration: 3VSS2008.

Carolina D Weller, Sue Evans, Christopher M Reid, Rory Wolfe, John McNeil

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Trials, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Compression for venous leg ulcers.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Carolina D WellerDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Level 3 Burnet Building, The Alfred Hospital, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. carolina.weller@med.monash.edu.au
Sue Evans
Christopher M Reid
Rory Wolfe
John McNeil
The Alfred Hospital · AUMonash University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe incidence of venous ulceration is rising with the increasing age of the general population. Venous ulceration represents the most prevalent form of difficult to heal wounds and these problematic wounds require a significant amount of health care resources for treatment. Based on current knowledge multi-layer high compression system is described as the gold standard for treating venous ulcers. However, to date, despite our advances in venous ulcer therapy, no convincing low cost compression therapy studies have been conducted and there are no clear differences in the effectiveness of different types of high compression. METHODS/

designThe trial is designed as a pilot multicentre open label parallel group randomised trial. Male and female participants aged greater than 18 years with a venous ulcer confirmed by clinical assessment will be randomised to either the intervention compression bandage which consists of graduated lengths of 3 layers of elastic tubular compression bandage or to the short stretch inelastic compression bandage (control). The primary objective is to assess the percentage wound reduction from baseline compared to week 12 following randomisation. Randomisation will be allocated via a web based central independent randomisation service (nQuery v7) and stratified by study centre and wound size <or= 10 cm2 or >10 cm2. Neither participants nor study staff will be blinded to treatment. Outcome assessments will be undertaken by an assessor who is blinded to the randomisation process. DISCUSSION: The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of two compression bandages; graduated three layer straight tubular bandaging (3L) when compared to standard short stretch (SS) compression bandaging in healing venous ulcers in patients with chronic venous ulceration. The trial investigates the differences in clinical outcomes of two currently accepted ways of treating people with venous ulcers. This study will help answer the question whether the 3L compression system or the SS compression system is associated with better outcomes.

trial registrationACTRN12608000599370.

Indexed as

Stockings, CompressionWound HealingAdolescentAdultAustraliaChronic DiseaseFemaleHumansMalePilot ProjectsPressureResearch DesignTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeVaricose UlcerYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID20214822
PMCPMC2847559
OpenAlexW2103282203

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.