ArticleHealth science reports2024
Assessing placental membrane treatment efficiency in diabetic foot ulcers: Processing for retention versus lamination.
Article in Health science reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Retention processed placental membrane versus standard of care in treating diabetic foot ulcers.International wound journal · 2024Article
- Assessing placental membrane treatment efficiency in diabetic foot ulcers: Processing for retention versus lamination.Health science reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Diabetic foot ulcers are a severe complication in diabetic patients, significantly impact healthcare systems and patient quality of life, often leading to hospitalization and amputation. Traditional Standard of Care (SOC) treatments are inadequate for many patients, necessitating advanced wound care products (AWCPs) like human placental membranes. This study conducts a retrospective analysis to compare the effectiveness of two human placental membrane products, retention-processed amnion chorion (RE-AC) and lamination-processed amnion chorion (L-AC) in managing chronic diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). Methods: The study collected retrospective observational data from electronic health records (EHRs) of patients treated for DFU at three outpatient wound care centers. Patients were categorized into two cohorts based on the treatment received. Key metrics included wound size progression and the number of product applications. The analysis employed Bayesian estimation, utilizing an analysis of covariance model with a Hurdle Gamma likelihood. Results: We found that RE-AC achieved a marginally higher expected Percent Area Reduction (xPAR) in DFUs compared to L-AC at 12 weeks (67.3% vs. 52.6%). RE-AC also required fewer applications, suggesting greater efficiency in general wound closure. Probability of full wound closure was similar in both groups (0.738 vs 0.740 in RE-AC and L-AC, respectively). Conclusion: The findings suggest that while L-AC might be slightly more effective in complete ulcer healing, RE-AC offers overall better treatment efficiency, especially in reducing the frequency of applications. This efficiency can lead to improved patient comfort, reduced treatment costs, and optimized resource utilization in healthcare settings.
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.