Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33402404›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2021

Effectiveness of a hydrogel dressing as an analgesic adjunct to first aid for the treatment of acute paediatric burn injuries: a prospective randomised controlled trial.

Maleea Denise Holbert, Roy M Kimble, Mark Chatfield, Bronwyn R Griffin

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Hydrogels in Burn Wound Management-A Review.Gels (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Maleea Denise HolbertCentre for Children's Burns and Trauma Research, Centre for Children's Health Research, South Brisbane, Queensland, Australia m.holbert@uq.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-9902-5122
Roy M KimbleCentre for Children's Burns and Trauma Research, Centre for Children's Health Research, South Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Mark ChatfieldFaculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Bronwyn R GriffinCentre for Children's Burns and Trauma Research, Centre for Children's Health Research, South Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Children's Medical Research Institute · AUThe University of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the effectiveness of two acute burn dressings, Burnaid hydrogel dressing and plasticised polyvinylchloride film, on reducing acute pain scores in paediatric burn patients following appropriate first aid.

designSingle-centre, superiority, two-arm, parallel-group, prospective randomised controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS AND

settingPaediatric patients (aged ≤16) presenting to the Emergency Department at the Queensland Children's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia, with an acute thermal burn were approached for participation in the trial from September 2017-September 2018.

interventionsPatients were randomised to receive either (1) Burnaid hydrogel dressing (intervention) or (2) plasticised polyvinylchloride film (Control) as an acute burn dressing. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: Observational pain scores from nursing staff assessed 5 min post application of the randomised dressing, measured using the Face Legs Activity Cry and Consolability Scale was the primary outcome. Repeated measures of pain, stress and re-epithelialisation were also collected at follow-up dressing changes until 95% wound re-epithelialisation occurred.

resultsSeventy-two children were recruited and randomised (n=37 intervention; n=35 control). No significant between-group differences in nursing (mean difference: -0.1, 95% CI -0.7 to 0.5, p=0.72) or caregiver (MD: 1, 95% CI -8 to 11, p=0.78) observational pain scores were identified. Moreover, no significant differences in child self-report pain (MD: 0.3, 95% CI -1.7 to 2.2, p=0.78), heart rate (MD: -3, 95% CI -11 to 5, p=0.41), temperature (MD: 0.6, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.24, p=0.53), stress (geometric mean ratio: 1.53, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.53, p=0.10), or re-epithelialisation rates (MD: -1, 95% CI -3 to 1, p=0.26) were identified between the two groups.

conclusionsA clear benefit of Burnaid hydrogel dressing as an analgesic adjunct to first aid for the treatment of acute paediatric burns was not identified in this investigation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12617001274369).

Indexed as

BurnsFirst AidAgedAnalgesicsAustraliaBandagesChildHumansHydrogelsProspective StudiesQueenslandAnalgesicsHydrogelsaccident & emergency medicinepaediatricspain managementwound management

Identifiers

PMID33402404
PMCPMC7786810
OpenAlexW3118875615

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.