Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22672730›Full record

Trial reportInternational wound journal2013

Taking the pressure off in the Emergency Department: evaluation of the prophylactic application of a low shear, soft silicon sacral dressing on high risk medical patients.

Katrina Cubit, Bernadette McNally, Violeta Lopez

Open access · greenAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International wound journal, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Katrina CubitMRCNA, Learning and Development Unit, Calvary Health Care ACT, Bruce, Australia Wound Management and Quality Support, Calvary Health Care ACT, Bruce, Australia Research Centre for Nursing and Midwifery, Australian National University, Medical School, Woden, Australia.
Bernadette McNally
Violeta Lopez
Calvary Hospital · AUAustralian National University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pressure injuries are key clinical indicators of care standard. In Australia, pressure injuries increase length of hospital stay by 4.31 and cost $285 million annually. This pilot study examined the effectiveness of sacral dressing in reducing the prevalence of pressure injuries in older, high-risk patients. A non randomised one-sample experimental design was used in this study comprising of four phases. Of the 51 patients recruited to the study, one patient developed a sacral pressure injury compared to six patients identified in a known group with similar demographics who were not approached to participate in the study. The results indicated that patients in the known group were 5.4 times more likely to develop a pressure injury than the intervention group. Findings suggest that applying a protective sacral dressing with a low shear backing as part of a simple standardised prevention injury prevention regime commencing in the Emergency Department was beneficial in the prevention of pressure injury in older 'at high risk' medical patients.

Indexed as

BandagesSiliconAgedAged, 80 and overAustraliaEmergency Service, HospitalEquipment DesignFemaleHumansIncidenceLength of StayMalePressure UlcerSacrumSiliconOlder person; Pressure injury; Sacral

Identifiers

PMID22672730
PMCPMC7950960
OpenAlexW2005436384

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.