ArticleInternational wound journal2020
Efficacy of a povidone-iodine foam dressing (Betafoam) on diabetic foot ulcer.
Article in International wound journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02732886 (A Pilot Study to Compare Efficacy of Medifoam® and Betafoam® as a New Dressing Including Povidone-iodine, in Patients With Diabetes Foot Ulcer), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
A Pilot Study to Compare Efficacy of Medifoam® and Betafoam® as a New Dressing Including Povidone-iodine, in Patients With Diabetes Foot Ulcer
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Hyodine on Healing of Diabetic Foot Ulcer: A Randomized Single-Blind Controlled Trial.Endocrine, metabolic & immune disorders drug targets · 2026Trial
- Prospective randomised placebo-controlled trial assessing the efficacy of silver dressings to enhance healing of acute diabetes-related foot ulcers.Diabetologia · 2023Trial
- Article
- Designing Composite Stimuli-Responsive Hydrogels for Wound Healing Applications: The State-of-the-Art and Recent Discoveries.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Uncovering the Benefits of Povidone Iodine Compared to Other Therapeutic Agents in Wound Infection Prevention and Healing Outcomes: A Scoping Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Article
- Biomedical materials for wound dressing: recent advances and applications.RSC advances · 2023Review
- Antiseptic Agents for Chronic Wounds: A Systematic Review.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Clinical Study on the Efficacy of Silver Ion Dressing Combined with Prontosan Gel Dressing in the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Ulcers and the Effect on Serum Inflammatory Factors.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2021Article
- Efficacy of a povidone-iodine foam dressing (Betafoam) on diabetic foot ulcer.International wound journal · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This study aimed to assess the efficacy of a new povidone-iodine (PVP-I) foam dressing (Betafoam) vs foam dressing (Medifoam) for the management of diabetic foot ulcers. This study was conducted between March 2016 and September 2017 at 10 sites in Korea. A total of 71 patients (aged ≥19 years) with type 1/2 diabetes and early-phase diabetic foot ulcers (Wagener classification grade 1/2) were randomised to treatment with PVP-I foam dressing or foam dressing for 8 weeks. Wound healing, wound infection, patient satisfaction, and adverse events (AEs) were assessed. The PVP-I foam and foam dressing groups were comparable in the proportion of patients with complete wound healing within 8 weeks (44.4% vs 42.3%, P = .9191), mean (±SD) number of days to complete healing (31.00 ± 15.07 vs 33.27 ± 12.60 days; P = .6541), and infection rates (11.1% vs 11.4%; P = 1.0000). Median satisfaction score (scored from 0 to 10) at the final visit was also comparable between groups (10 vs 9, P = .2889). There was no significant difference in AE incidence (27.8% vs 17.1%, P = .2836), and none of the reported AEs had a causal relationship with the dressings. The results of this study suggest that PVP-I foam dressing has wound-healing efficacy comparable with foam dressing, with no notable safety concerns. This study was funded by Mundipharma Korea Ltd and registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT02732886).
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.