Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30900365›Full record

SynthesisInternational wound journal2019

Review of adjustable velcro wrap devices for venous ulceration.

Philip W Stather, Carroll Petty, Adam Q Howard

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International wound journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. [Evidence of compression therapy with special consideration of medical adaptive compression systems].Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete · 2020
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Philip W StatherDepartment of Vascular Surgery, Colchester Hospital University NHS Foundation Trust, Colchester, UK.
Carroll PettyDepartment of Vascular Surgery, Colchester Hospital University NHS Foundation Trust, Colchester, UK.
Adam Q HowardDepartment of Vascular Surgery, Colchester Hospital University NHS Foundation Trust, Colchester, UK.
Colchester Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Compression therapy is the mainstay of treatment for patients with venous leg ulcers. Current gold standard is 4 layer bandaging, which has a significant impact on patients comfort, ability to wear their own shoes, and quality of life, as well as taking significant time to apply, and losing compression over time. This systematic review aims to evaluate the use of Velcro wrap devices for the treatment of venous ulceration. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used to identify articles reporting the use of Velcro wrap devices in patients with venous ulceration. Sixteen articles were identified (14 case series, 1 randomised trial, and 1 audit) reporting on 192 patients. There were reports of improved time to healing, reduced cost by >50%, reduced number and duration of nursing appointments, and improved quality of life in patients in Velcro wrap devices. Although the evidence remains poor, Velcro devices have potential to improve outcomes for patients with venous ulceration and further good quality studies should be undertaken to evaluate these further.

Indexed as

Compression BandagesAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedVaricose UlcerWound Healingcompressionjuxtacuresvelcro wrapvenous ulcer

Identifiers

PMID30900365
PMCPMC7948540
OpenAlexW2924970249

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.