Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24007311›Full record

ArticleInternational wound journal2015

Predicting complex acute wound healing in patients from a wound expertise centre registry: a prognostic study.

Dirk T Ubbink, Robert Lindeboom, Anne M Eskes, Huub Brull, Dink A Legemate, Hester Vermeulen

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International wound journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Rapid identification of slow healing wounds.Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Dirk T UbbinkDepartment of Quality Assurance & Process Innovation, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Robert LindeboomDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Anne M EskesResearch Center Linnaeus Institute, Spaarne Hospital and Kennemer Gasthuis, Haarlem, the Netherlands.
Huub BrullMitralis Expertise Centre for Wound Care, Heerlen, the Netherlands.
Dink A LegemateDepartment of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Hester VermeulenDepartment of Quality Assurance & Process Innovation, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam · NLSpaarne Gasthuis · NLUniversity of Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is important for caregivers and patients to know which wounds are at risk of prolonged wound healing to enable timely communication and treatment. Available prognostic models predict wound healing in chronic ulcers, but not in acute wounds, that is, originating after trauma or surgery. We developed a model to detect which factors can predict (prolonged) healing of complex acute wounds in patients treated in a large wound expertise centre (WEC). Using Cox and linear regression analyses, we determined which patient- and wound-related characteristics best predict time to complete wound healing and derived a prediction formula to estimate how long this may take. We selected 563 patients with acute wounds, documented in the WEC registry between 2007 and 2012. Wounds had existed for a median of 19 days (range 6-46 days). The majority of these were located on the leg (52%). Five significant independent predictors of prolonged wound healing were identified: wound location on the trunk [hazard ratio (HR) 0·565, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0·405-0·788; P = 0·001], wound infection (HR 0·728, 95% CI 0·534-0·991; P = 0·044), wound size (HR 0·993, 95% CI 0·988-0·997; P = 0·001), wound duration (HR 0·998, 95% CI 0·996-0·999; P = 0·005) and patient's age (HR 1·009, 95% CI 1·001-1·018; P = 0·020), but not diabetes. Awareness of the five factors predicting the healing of complex acute wounds, particularly wound infection and location on the trunk, may help caregivers to predict wound healing time and to detect, refer and focus on patients who need additional attention.

Indexed as

Acute DiseaseAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsChildDisease ManagementFemaleHumansLinear ModelsMaleMiddle AgedNetherlandsPrognosisProportional Hazards ModelsAcute woundsPredictionPrognosisWound expertise centreWound healing

Identifiers

PMID24007311
PMCPMC7950520
OpenAlexW1836544736

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.