Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30326972›Full record

Trial reportBMC research notes2018

Healing rates in diabetes-related foot ulcers using low frequency ultrasonic debridement versus non-surgical sharps debridement: a randomised controlled trial.

Lucia Michailidis, Shan M Bergin, Terry P Haines, Cylie M Williams

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC research notes, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04633642 (Cellular Proliferation, Dermal Repair, and Microbiological Effectiveness of Ultrasound Assisted Wound Debridement), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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.

NCT04633642 nacompletednot on this map

Cellular Proliferation, Dermal Repair, and Microbiological Effectiveness of Ultrasound Assisted Wound Debridement (UAW) Versus Standard Wound Treatment in Complicated Diabetic Foot Ulcers (DFU): A Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversidad Complutense de MadridRan2017 to 2019Enrolled51ConditionsDiabetic Foot UlcerArmsUltrasound group, Surgical group
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Lucia MichailidisPodiatry Department, Monash Health, Monash Medical Centre, 246 Clayton Road, Clayton, VIC, 3168, Australia. LMichailidis@phcn.vic.gov.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7429-6658
Shan M BerginPodiatry Department, Monash Health, Monash Medical Centre, 246 Clayton Road, Clayton, VIC, 3168, Australia.
Terry P HainesPhysiotherapy Department, School of Primary and Allied Health Care, Monash University, McMahons Rd, Frankston, VIC, 3199, Australia.
Cylie M WilliamsPhysiotherapy Department, School of Primary and Allied Health Care, Monash University, McMahons Rd, Frankston, VIC, 3199, Australia.
Monash Medical Centre · AUMonash University · AUPeninsula Health · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveCurrent clinical practice varies around debridement techniques used to promote healing of diabetes-related foot ulcers. This randomised controlled study will compare healing rates for diabetes-related foot ulcers treated with low frequency ultrasonic debridement versus non-surgical sharps debridement. Individuals with diabetes-related foot ulcers being managed by podiatry at a metropolitan hospital were screened against study criteria. Eligible participants were randomly allocated to either the non-surgical sharps debridement group or the low frequency ultrasonic debridement group and received weekly treatment for 6 months. Participants also completed a quality of life measure and visual analogue pain scale.

resultsThis trial was ended early due to recruitment issues. Ten participants with 14 ulcers participated. Results were analysed using a survival analysis approach. Ulcers treated with non-surgical sharps debridement healed more quickly (61.6 days ± 24.4) compared with low frequency ultrasonic debridement (117.6 days ± 40.3). In both groups, quality of life was observed to improve as ulcers healed and pain levels reduced as ulcers improved. Observations from this study found faster healing using non-surgical sharps debridement. However, these results are unable to be generalised due to the small sample size. Further research is recommended. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry: ACTRN12612000490875.

Indexed as

Outcome Assessment, Health CareAdultDebridementDiabetic FootHumansUltrasonic TherapyDebridementDiabetes complicationsUltrasonicsWound healing

Identifiers

PMID30326972
PMCPMC6192336
OpenAlexW2896914135

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.