Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33934606›Full record

SynthesisHip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy2023

Efficacy of hydrofibre dressing following total joint arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Raman Mundi, Harman Chaudhry, Seper Ekhtiari, Prabjit Ajrawat, Daniel M Tushinski, Thomas J Wood, Mohit Bhandari

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Hip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Raman MundiDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Harman ChaudhryDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Seper EkhtiariDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Prabjit AjrawatDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8819-1347
Daniel M TushinskiDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Thomas J WoodDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Mohit BhandariDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
McMaster University · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIn the United States, over 1,000,000 total joint arthroplasty (TJA) surgeries are performed annually and has been forecasted that this number will exceed 4,000,000 by the year 2030. Many different types of dressing exist for use in TJA surgery, and it is unclear if any of the newer, hydrofibre dressings are superior to traditional dressings at reducing rates of infections or improving wound healing. Thus, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the impact of hydrofiber dressings on reducing complications.

methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using the online databases MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing hydrofibre dressings to a standard dressing were included. Summary measures are reported as odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Our primary outcome was prosthetic joint infection (PJI). Secondary outcomes included blisters, dressing changes and wound irritation.

results5 RCTs were included. Hydrofibre dressing had no observable effect on PJI or wound irritation (OR 0.53; 95% CI, 0.14-1.98;

conclusionsIn conclusion, evidence suggests hydrofibre dressings have no observable effect on PJI and wound irritation. Evidence for reduction in blisters and number of dressings is modest given wide CIs and biased trial methodologies. Use of hydrofibre dressings should be considered inconclusive for mitigating major complications in light of current best evidence.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipBlisterBandagesHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurgical Wound InfectionWound Healingarthroplastyhydrofiber dressinginfection

Identifiers

PMID33934606
PMCPMC9827482
OpenAlexW3159565755

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.