ArticleJournal of minimal access surgery2024
Role of single-ring oval disposable wound protecting device in preventing surgical site infection in laparoscopic colorectal resections.
Article in Journal of minimal access surgery, 2024. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextSurgical site infections (SSI) continue to be a major cause of morbidity, mortality, prolonged hospital stays and a major reason of financial burden to health-care providers and patients after major abdominal surgeries. Along with infection control practices and care bundles, additional use of devices which protect the wound from contamination is believed to decrease the burden of SSI.
aimsThis study aims to assess the benefit of single-ring disposable wound protector in preventing SSI, overall complications, hospitals stay and morbidity data in laparoscopic colorectal resection. SETTINGS AND
designThe study design involves case-control study, retrospective. SUBJECTS AND
methodsA case-control study comparing single ring oval wound protector versus conventional wound protectors retrospectively between August 2019 and December 2021. The ease of use of the device, rate of SSI, overall complications, hospitals stay and morbidity data were analysed. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: The statistical analysis was performed by IBM SPSS Statistics 20 version. All Categorical Variables will be described as frequency and percentage. Continuous variables will be described as mean ± standard deviation. Continuous variables were analysed using t-test and categorical parameters using Fisher's exact test.
resultsOf the 110 patients studied, wound Protecting devices were used in 58 patients Wound Protector Group (WPG group) and 62 patients did not use such devices (no WPG). The groups were comparable in demographic features, risk features, systemic illness, type of surgeries undertaken and the specimen extraction wound used. There was a significant decrease in the incidence of SSI (1.7% vs. 16% P ≤ 0.008) and the hospital stay (P ≤ 0.03) when WPG was used compared to the group in which it was not used.
conclusionsApart from the use of infection control practices and care bundles, the use of oval-shaped single-ring wound protector is likely to reduce SSI.
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.