Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37841078›Full record

ArticleNursing research and practice2023

Purulent Skin and Soft Tissue Infections, Challenging the Practice of Incision and Drainage: A Scoping Review.

Liam Stout, Melanie Stephens, Farina Hashmi

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Nursing research and practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. CutaneousInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Liam StoutUniversity of Salford, Salford, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9344-5898
Melanie StephensUniversity of Salford, Salford, UK.
Farina HashmiUniversity of Salford, Salford, UK.
University of Salford · GBCalderdale and Huddersfield NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim: To generate a landscape of the current knowledge in the interventional management and outcomes of purulent skin and soft tissue infections. Design: This study is a scoping review. Methods: Electronic searches were undertaken using CINAHL, Medline, Cochrane Library, British Nursing Index, Science Direct, the National Health Service knowledge and library hub, ClinicalTrials.gov, and MedNar. The population, concept, context framework, and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews were utilised, supporting a rigorous appraisal and synthesis of literature. Results: Nineteen papers were reviewed. Incision and drainage with primary closure, needle aspiration, loop drainage, catheter drainage, and suction drainage are viable adjuncts or alternatives to the traditional surgical management of skin and soft tissue abscesses. Conclusion: Despite the empirically favourable alternatives to the incision and drainage technique demonstrated, this does not appear to be driving a change in clinical practice. Future research must now look to mixed and qualitative evidence to understand the causative mechanisms of incision and drainage and its ritualistic practice.

Identifiers

PMID37841078
PMCPMC10575745
OpenAlexW4387395302

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.