ArticleWorld journal of orthopedics2025
Comparative study between combined oblique and vertical everting running stitch and the conventional suturing technique.
Article in World journal of orthopedics, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWound management is an essential part of emergency medicine practice. A good suture technique should deal a complex irregular traumatic wound without any complications of dehiscence/gaping, infection, delayed wound healing, frequent dressings and further stay in hospital. There is no ideal technique of suturing for any wound. In pursuit of the new techniques, we have introduced a new suturing technique called combined oblique and vertical everting running (COVER) stitch which has showed good healing with less complications.
aimTo compare the outcomes between the COVER stitch and conventional suturing group.
methodsIn this study, we included 40 cases which were divided into two groups. Group 1 patients were managed by COVER stitch, and group 2 patients underwent conventional suturing for their wounds. The outcomes were measured in terms of scar quality, suturing duration and length of suture material used, suturing related complications and suture removal time which were compared by
resultsBetter results were seen in COVER stitch than the conventional suturing. COVER group had significantly better results in terms of time taken for suture, amount suture material used and time taken for suture removal compared to the conventional group. No wound related complications were seen in this group. Moreover, scar formed was also better in COVER group.
conclusionCOVER stitch is another new technique which can be used to deal simple to complex wounds and it is an emerging idea with good healthy scars with less complications.
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.