Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35088531›Full record

Trial reportInternational wound journal2022

The impact of two distinct endotracheal tube fixation on the formation of pressure ulcer in the intensive care unit: A randomised controlled trial.

Alev Genc, Tulin Yildiz

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International wound journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Dressings and topical agents for preventing pressure ulcers.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

2 authors.

Alev GencDepartment of Surgical Diseases Nursing, Bahcesehir University, Institute of Health Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey.
Tulin YildizDepartment of Surgical Diseases Nursing, Tekirdag Namık Kemal University, Institute of Health Sciences, Tekirdag, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4981-6671

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The most common pressure ulcer associated with medical devices in the ICU is pressure injury associated with the endotracheal tube. We aimed to scrutinise the effects of two different techniques of endotracheal tube securement used in the ICU on the occurrence of pressure ulcers. This randomised clinical trial was conducted in 60 patients, 30 of which were intervention and 30 experimental, admittedin the ICU of a training and research hospitaldata were collected using the descriptive and clinical characteristics from the Braden Scale for predicting Pressure Sore Risk, the Pressure Ulcer Scale for healing, The International Staging System for Pressure Injuries and the Eilers Oral Assessment Guide. Based on the Braden Scale scores of the patients, we found that 98.3% of the cases were in the high-risk group before and after the intervention. We also found that the recovery was higher among patients in whom the bandage fixation method was applied compared to those in whom the fixation was done with an endotracheal tube holder.

Indexed as

Pressure UlcerHumansIntensive Care UnitsIntubation, IntratrachealRisk Factorsendotracheal tube holderintensive carenursing carepressure ulcer

Identifiers

PMID35088531
PMCPMC9493224

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.