ArticleHeliyon2020
An evaluation of phototherapy device performance in a tertiary health facility.
Article in Heliyon, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionA range of phototherapy devices are commercially available. The American Academy of Pediatrics (2004) recommends routine intensity measurement of phototherapy devices to ensure that babies affected by hyperbilirubinemia receive effective phototherapy.
objectiveThe aims of this study were to calculate the irradiance decay velocity of phototherapy devices used in a tertiary care hospital to evaluate whether current maintenance procedures for phototherapy devices are effective, and to contribute to the improvement of a standardized maintenance procedure in daily practice, thus helping to ensure that all babies affected by hyperbilirubinemia receive prompt treatment.
methodsThis research represents a prospective observational study conducted at Dr. Soetomo Academic Teaching Hospital in Surabaya, Indonesia from February 2019-July 2019. The intensities of 11 phototherapy devices were measured at specific times using a Bili Blanket Meter II. We calculated the Δ irradiance differences in μW/cm
resultsAmong the 11 phototherapy devices included in this study, nine were fluorescent and two were light-emitting diode (LED) machines. The mean (standard deviation) irradiance decay velocity of the fluorescent lamps was 0.02 (±0.03) μW/cm
conclusionIrradiance decay occurred in all phototherapy device lamps. It is important to perform routinely intensity measurements, regardless of manufacturer recommendations, to avoid ineffective phototherapy resulting from intensities lower than the required therapeutic levels.
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.