Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31820850›Full record

Observational studyJournal of clinical nursing2020

Wound care practices across two acute care settings: A comparative study.

Brigid M Gillespie, Rachel Walker, Frances Lin, Shelley Roberts, Anne Eskes, Jodie Perry, Sean Birgan, Paul Nieuwenhoven, Elizabeth Garrahy, Rosalind Probert and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of clinical nursing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Brigid M GillespieSchool of Nursing & Midwifery, Health, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3186-5691
Rachel WalkerSchool of Nursing & Midwifery, Health, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6089-8225
Frances LinSchool of Nursing & Midwifery, Health, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8735-5469
Shelley RobertsSchool of Dietetics & Nutrition, Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service, Health, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Qld, Australia.
Anne EskesNursing, Amsterdam Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jodie PerryIntegrated & Ambulatory Services, Nursing, Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia.
Sean BirganDivision of Surgery, Nursing, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Qld, Australia.
Paul NieuwenhovenSurgical and Procedural Services, Nursing, Gold Coast Hospital and Health Service, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia.
Elizabeth GarrahyDivision of Surgery, Nursing, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Qld, Australia.
Rosalind ProbertStomal Therapy and Wound Management Department, Nursing, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Qld, Australia.
Wendy ChaboyerSchool of Nursing & Midwifery, Health, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia.
Griffith University · AUPrincess Alexandra Hospital · AUGold Coast Hospital · AU

Funding

Gold Coast Health & Gold Coast Hospital Foundation RGS-LG0007
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

AIMS AND

objectivesDescribe and compare current surgical wound care practices across two hospitals in two health services districts, Australia.

backgroundSurgical site infections (SSI) are a complication of surgery and occur in up to 9.5% of surgical procedures, yet they are preventable. Despite the existence of clinical guidelines for SSI prevention, there remains high variation in wound care practice.

designProspective comparative design using structured observations and chart audit.

methodsA specifically developed audit tool was used to collect data on observed wound care practices, documentation of wound assessment and practice, and patients' clinical characteristics from patients' electronic medical records. Structured observations of a consecutive sample of surgical patients receiving wound care with a convenience sample of nurses were undertaken. The manuscript adheres to the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement.

resultsIn total, 154 nurses undertaking acute wound care and 257 surgical patients who received wound care were observed. Across hospitals, hand hygiene adherence after dressing change was lowest (Hospital A: 8/113, 7%; Hospital B: 16/144, 11%; χ

conclusionsClinical variations in wound care practice are likely influenced by clinical context. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Using an evidence-based approach to surgical wound management will help reduce patients' risk of wound-related complications.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAustraliaCritical CareFemaleHand HygieneHumansMaleMiddle AgedNursing Staff, HospitalProspective StudiesSurgical Wound InfectionYoung Adultacute careclinical guidelinesdocumentationevidence-based practicehospitalsnursesnursing practicepost-operative caresurgical nursingwound care

Identifiers

PMID31820850
PMCPMC7328782
OpenAlexW2995457858

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.