ArticleProceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center)2018
Comparison of a standardized negative pressure wound therapy protocol after midline celiotomy to primary skin closure and traditional open wound vacuum-assisted closure management.
Article in Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) protocol using Hydrofera Blue® bacteriostatic foam wicks and silver-impregnated foam overlay to close midline skin incisions after emergency celiotomy was compared to primary skin closure only and traditional open wound vacuum-assisted closure management as part of a quality improvement initiative. This single-institution retrospective cohort study assessed all consecutive emergency celiotomies from July 2013 to June 2014 excluding clean wounds. Included variables were demographics, wound classification, NPWT days, and surgical site occurrences (SSOs). Primary outcome was days of NPWT. Secondary outcomes included SSOs (surgical site infections, fascial dehiscence, return to operating room). Analysis used exact chi-square between categorical variables, Kruskal-Wallis for analysis of variance for ordinal and categorical variables, and Wilcoxon rank sum for total days of NPWT. One hundred fifty-eight patients underwent emergency celiotomy with primary skin closure (
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.