Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33215768›Full record

Trial reportWound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society2021

Prophylactic dressings in the prevention of pressure ulcer related to the use of personal protective equipment by health professionals facing the COVID-19 pandemic: A randomized clinical trial.

Renata Cristina Gasparino, Maria Helena Melo Lima, Ana Railka de Souza Oliveira-Kumakura, Vanessa Abreu da Silva, Mariana de Jesus Meszaros, Ivan Rogério Antunes

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
12.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Prophylactic dressings in the prevention of pressure ulcer related to the use of personal protective equipment by health professionals facing the COVID-19 pandemic: A randomized clinical trial.Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair Society · 2021
    Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Observational
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Renata Cristina GasparinoSchool of Nursing, University of Campinas - Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-8729-4707
Maria Helena Melo LimaSchool of Nursing, University of Campinas - Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-6521-8324
Ana Railka de Souza Oliveira-KumakuraSchool of Nursing, University of Campinas - Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
Vanessa Abreu da SilvaUniversity Hospital, University of Campinas - Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
Mariana de Jesus MeszarosUniversity Hospital, University of Campinas - Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
Ivan Rogério AntunesUniversity Hospital, University of Campinas - Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.
Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Device-related pressure injury (DRPI) is a serious problem that is affecting professionals working on the front lines against COVID-19 due to the prolonged use of personal protective equipment (PPE). In addition to the physical and psychological integrity of professionals, these injuries can compromise the quality of care. Therefore, using technologies to prevent this adverse effect is an urgent matter. This is a parallel two-arm randomized clinical trial without the use of a control group to compare the use of foam and extra-thin hydrocolloid in preventing DRPI associated with the use of PPE by health professionals working on the front lines against coronavirus. In total, 88 professionals were divided into two groups: foam and hydrocolloid. Data were collected using two instruments and related to demographic and professional characteristics and skin evaluation. Each volunteer received one of the dressings, both with the same dimensions and arranged over similar regions, and data were gathered at baseline and after 6 or 12 hours. Descriptive and inferential analytic statistical methods were used; the significance level adopted was 5%. No participant developed DRPI, but four areas with hyperemia were observed in the foam group (two in the forehead, one in the cheeks, and one in the nose bridge), as well as four areas with hyperemia in the hydrocolloid group (two in the nose bridge, one in the right ear, and one in the left ear). There was no difference between the groups regarding skin conditions and discomfort (P > .05). The average cost obtained was $ 5.8/person and $ 4.4/person in the foam group and the hydrocolloid group, respectively, considering the dressing measurements. The results show that foam and extra-thin hydrocolloid were effective in preventing DRPI associated with the use of PPE.

Indexed as

Bandages, HydrocolloidHealth PersonnelPandemicsAdultCOVID-19FemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMalePersonal Protective EquipmentPressure UlcerSARS-CoV-2Wound Healing

Identifiers

PMID33215768
PMCPMC7753594
OpenAlexW3105407726

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.