ArticleHeliyon2020
Hydrocolloid versus silicone gel for the prevention of nasal injury in newborns submitted to noninvasive ventilation: A randomized clinical trial.
Article in Heliyon, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prophylactic dressings for preventing nasal pressure ulcer in premature newborns: an effectiveness review.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 2025Pooled it
- OcclusiveEuropean respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the effectiveness of the hydrocolloid and the silicone gel on the nasal protection of the newborns (NBs) during the use of noninvasive ventilation (NIV). MATERIALS AND
methodsThirty-three NBs were selected. They were randomly divided into three groups of 11 NBs, according to the type of nasal protection used: hydrocolloid, thick silicone gel, and thin silicone gel. The stage of the nasal injury and need for exchanging nasal protection were assessed before the connection to the NIV and every 24 h until the physician's authorization for NIV's suspension.
resultsThe mean gestational age was 32.03 ± 3.93 weeks, and the median birth weight was 1760 g (750-3535 g). The incidence of nasal injury using hydrocolloid, thick silicone gel, and a thin silicone gel group was 36.36%, 81.81%, and 72.72%, respectively (p = 0.06). Regarding the injury stage, there was no statistical significance between the three study groups. The hydrocolloid protection type had the best adhesion (p = 0.03) on the NBs' skin.
conclusionsAlthough this study was conducted by local practice patterns, the results showed that the hydrocolloid could be the best choice to prevent the nasal septum base injury in the NB submitted to NIV.
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.