ArticleJournal of orthopaedic case reports2025
Clinical Significance of Vacuum assisted Closure in Management of Infected Wound: An Observational, Comparative Study.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic case reports, 2025. 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) is an alternative method of wound management, which uses negative pressure to prepare the wound for spontaneous healing or for lesser reconstructive options.Aims and Objectives: To determine the effectiveness of VAC dressings in the healing of chronic wounds, as compared to normal wound dressings. Materials and Methods: The study was conducted among 60 patients with chronic wounds randomly divided into groups of 30 each, to compare VAC dressing with conventional dressings. Results: There was a significant difference in total hospital stay, granulation tissue fill up and graft take up in both groups. The mean duration of hospital stay in Group A and Group B was 22.4 ± 5.61 and 28.57 ± 6.45 days, respectively. The mean percentage of granulation tissue formation in Group A was 94.12 ± 6.03, and in Group B was 91.2 ± 2.71. Conclusion: Activated Carbon dressing was found to be more beneficial and patient- patient friendly with lesser hospital stay and thus lesser cost than conventional dressings.
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.