ArticleTanaffos2014
Efficacy of Dressing with Absorbent Foam versus Dressing with Gauze in Prevention of Tracheostomy Site Infection.
Article in Tanaffos, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Treatment algorithm: tracheostoma and cannula care for critically ill patients].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2026Article
- Expert consensus-based clinical practice guidelines for Care and weaning procedures in tracheostomized ICU patients after invasive mechanical ventilation: a joint statement by the Intensive Care Physiotherapy Society (SKR) and the French Intensive Care Society (SRLF).Annals of intensive care · 2026Article
- The Impact of Follow-Up Care on Tracheostomy Management Post-Hospital Discharge: A Longitudinal Cohort Study of Clinical Outcomes, Quality of Life, and Long-Term Recovery.Tracheostomy (Warrenville, Ill.) · 2025Article
- Management of tracheostomies in the intensive care unit: a scoping review.BMJ open respiratory research · 2020Article
- Tracheotomy in the intensive care unit: guidelines from a French expert panel.Annals of intensive care · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTracheostomy site infection can cause numerous problems. Absorbent foam dressing may be able to prevent proliferation of infectious microorganisms by absorbing the tracheostomy stoma exudate. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of absorbent foam with gauze dressing for prevention of tracheostomy site infection. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this double-blind randomized clinical trial, 80 patients (18 to 60 years) hospitalized in the intensive care unit (ICU) due to severe head injury were randomly divided into two groups and early tracheostomy was done for them during the first 2 days. In the first group, gauze was used as tracheostomy site dressing, while in the second, absorbent foam, was placed. Tracheostomy site was checked daily for any sign of infection and samples were taken from the stoma for culture in case of presence of any sign of infection.
resultsOf a total of 80, 11 had tracheostomy site infection (13.75%), including 7 (17.5%) in the gauze group and 4 (10%) in the foam group. The difference in this regard between the two groups was not significant (P=0.051). Also, the dominant strains in the culture of gauze group were hospital-acquired Gram-negative bacteria (particularly Acinetobacter), while in the foam group, Gram-positives and more commonly Staphylococcus epidermidis were found.
conclusionAbsorbent foam dressing is not superior to gauze dressings for prevention of tracheostomy site infection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25506371PMC4260068W2151926837What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.