Observational studyExperimental dermatology2021
A non-contact device for fast screening of wound infections.
Observational study in Experimental dermatology, 2021. 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Screening for wound infection relies on the expertise of the provider. Clinical diagnosis of infections based on wound swab/biopsy results often takes a few days and may not assess the full wound. There is a need for a non-invasive tool that can quickly and accurately diagnose wound infection. Leukocyte esterase strips are used to identify various infectious diseases. However, it is not clear whether infected wounds also have elevated leukocyte esterase activities as compared with non-infected wounds. To achieve the objective, a device was developed to detect elevated leukocyte esterase activities in wounds by measuring wound exudates adsorbed onto wound dressings in 3 minutes. The efficacy of the device in assessing leukocyte esterase activities across various chronic wounds was tested. Such measurements were unaffected by the type of underlying wound dressing. By correlating the device outputs with clinical adjudication of infection, we found that this device had high positive predictive values for diagnosing wound infection in a wide variety of chronic wounds. In addition, a positive device output increases the probability of detecting infected wounds, while the negative device output reduces the probability of detecting infected wounds. This rapid non-contact and disposable diagnostic tool may serve as a rapid and accurate indication of infection in the chronic wound.
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.