ArticleJournal of hand surgery global online2026
Reverse Aqua Pump Negative Pressure Wound Therapy: A Noninferiority Randomized Controlled Trial of Effectiveness and Affordability in Optimizing the Inflammatory and Proliferative Phases of Wound Healing in Developing Countries.
Article in Journal of hand surgery global online, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Negative pressure wound treatment (NPWT) has been proven effective in accelerating wound healing. However, its high cost limits its use in developing countries, and innovations have largely focused on supplementary rather than core system components. The reverse aqua pump (RAP)-NPWT was developed as a low-cost alternative with effectiveness equivalent to commercial NPWT. This study aims to assess clinical outcomes and analyze the costs of using RAP-NPWT in patients requiring further reconstruction wounds with skin grafts. Methods: A noninferiority randomized controlled trial design comparing RAP-NPWT with commercial NPWT through comparative outcome, correlation analysis, and cost evaluation. A total of 24 subjects (12 RAP-NPWT and 12 NPWT control) were analyzed with no significant differences in baseline characteristics. Results: No significant difference was found in the degree of granulation from the first day to the end of treatment. Bone exposure did not affect granulation development, and the duration of NPWT use between groups did not differ. Economically, RAP-NPWT showed significantly lower treatment costs with a negative incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and cost-minimization analysis, placing it as the dominant intervention that is both more cost effective. Conclusions: Overall, RAP-NPWT provides noninferior clinical efficacy to commercial NPWT but at a significantly lower cost, making it worthy of consideration as a more affordable solution in developing countries. Type of study/level of evidence: Randomized controlled trial IB.
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.