ArticleScientific reports2019
Evaluation of an Electro-Pneumatic Device for Artificial Capillary Pulse Generation used in a Prospective Study in Animals for Surgical Neck Wound Healing.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The paper examines the development and testing of an electro-pneumatic device for wound healing therapy after surgery in the neck area. The device generates air pressure values in a miniaturized cuff using electronic circuitry to drive an electro-valve and air compressor. The device works in two distinct modes: continuous pressure mode and pulsating pressure mode. The pressure value setting can vary from 3 to 11 mmHg, and the pulsating pressure mode's operating frequency range is approximately 0.1 to 0.3 Hz. Laboratory measurements were conducted to evaluate the device's correct functioning in both continuous and pulsating pressure modes. A four-day prospective study with animals (n = 10) was also conducted to evaluate neck wound healing therapy using the electro-pneumatic device. Out of the twelve histological parameters analysed to reveal the differences between the experimental and control wounds, only one demonstrated a significant difference. Out of the ten animals treated with the device, three showed a significant difference in terms of benefit after therapy. We can therefore conclude that the device potentially improves the wound healing process in the neck area if the pre-set air pressure value does not exceed 8 mmHg.
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.