Trial reportOral and maxillofacial surgery2018
Human bite injuries to the head and neck: current trends and management protocols in England and Wales.
Trial report in Oral and maxillofacial surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical Antimicrobial Prophylaxis in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Plastic Surgery: A RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method Consensus Study.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHuman bite injuries can be challenging in their presentation to the examining physician. In a study by Merchant et al., 18% of patients presenting with a human bite injury had suffered wounds to the head and neck region. Current trends in their initial management at presentation to emergency departments throughout England and Wales will be discussed in this paper. MATERIALS AND
methodA postal survey was sent out to 100 A&E lead clinicians. This was followed up by telephone enquiries to improve the response rate. The collated results of the survey were entered onto a spreadsheet (Microsoft Excel©) for the purpose of statistical review.
resultsA 68% response rate from A&E departments throughout England and Wales demonstrated a lack of consensus in the initial management and subsequent treatment of human bite injuries. Written protocols are in place for human bite injuries in 54.4% of units. In 100% of units, initial management involves irrigation +/- debridement of the wound, though there is a lack of agreement on the surgical management of the wound. 77.9% of units follow 'needle stick protocols' when stratifying risk for blood-borne viruses.
conclusionHuman bites pose a number of unique problems, ranging from cellulitis to the transmission of communicable diseases. The maxillofacial surgeon has the added dilemmas surrounding subsequent repair and reconstruction. Appreciation of the complexity of human bite injuries will ensure optimal care for the patient. We propose a set of guidelines developed 'in-house' to assist in the management of human bite injuries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.