Observational studyThe international journal of lower extremity wounds2026
The Prevalence of Contact Allergies for Wound Dressings in Patients With Diabetic Foot Ulcers (PAID Study), an Observational Prospective Trial.
Observational study in The international journal of lower extremity wounds, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04085705 (The Prevalence of Contact Allergies for Wound Dressings In Patients With Diabetic Foot Ulcers), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
The Prevalence of Contact Allergies for Wound Dressings In Patients With Diabetic Foot Ulcers
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Meta-analysis on the safety and efficacy of different dressings in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers.Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This investigator initiated prospective observational study investigates the prevalence of contact allergies in patients with a Diabetic Foot Ulcer (DFU). Patients with a DFU received a combined PATCH-test (a test used to investigate the origin of an allergic reaction on the skin) at the upper back, with the European baseline series, the European leg ulcer series, and local used material for leg ulcers. A total of 108 patients with DFU were included of which 86 (79.6%) were male, and 9 (8.3%) and 99 (91.7%) patients had Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes, respectively. Twenty-one patients had a sensitization in the standard series, 30 patients in the leg ulcer series, and 11 patients in both series. Two patients had a positive reaction for one of the local used materials. Most frequent sensitizations were found for Perubalsem (N = 6) and Fragrance-Mix II (N = 4) in the standard series. A sensitization for Povidone-Iodine (N = 20) was most frequently seen in the leg ulcer series. In the local used materials a sensitization for silver sulfadiazine (N = 1) and cutimed-gel (n = 1) were seen. In conclusion, this study provides novel information about sensitizations in patients with DFU, but more research is needed to demonstrate the relationship between allergic reactions and delayed wound healing. The study protocol was registered in www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04085705, PAID study).
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.