SynthesisInternational wound journal2024
A systematic review on the use of transforming powder dressing for wound care.
Synthesis in International wound journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review on the use of transforming powder dressing for wound care.International wound journal · 2024Pooled it
- Double Flap Tibial Transverse Transport Improves Microcirculation and Peripheral Nerve Function in Severe Diabetic Foot Ulcers.International wound journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The transforming powder dressing (Altrazeal®, Uluru Inc, Addison, TX, USA) is simple to use, painless to apply and has a wear time of up to 30 days. This study aims to review the current literature to elucidate the impact of transforming powder dressing on healing, pain management and overall patient outcomes. We conducted a systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Data including study characteristics, patient demographics and wound outcomes were extracted. Our systematic review included 26 articles (n = 175). Of these articles, 13 (50%) were case reports, 10 (38.5%) were case series, 2 (7.7%) were randomised controlled trials and 1 (3.8%) was a cohort study. Wound types included venous ulcer (23.9%), pressure sore (19.7%), burn (15.5%), skin graft (13.4%), diabetic foot ulcer (4.2%), Mohs defect (3.5%) and other (19.6%). Complete re-epithelialization occurred in 90.1% of the wounds. A total of 19 studies (73%) discussed pain, each of which reported reduced pain with the use of transforming powder dressing. The evaluated studies collectively suggest that transforming powder dressing offers a promising re-epithelialization rate and analgesic effect across various wound types.
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.