ArticleBMC nursing2026
Best evidence summary and nursing decision pathway for the nursing management of drainage-associated open surgical wounds following minimally invasive treatment for severe acute pancreatitis.
Article in BMC nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
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
Abstract
backgroundThis study identified, assessed, and integrated the best available evidence concerning the nursing management of drainage-associated open surgical wounds following minimally invasive treatment for severe acute pancreatitis, so as to develop nursing decision pathways and practical implementation tools for clinical practice.
methodThis study comprised a best evidence summary followed by translation of the synthesised evidence into a nursing decision pathway and five supporting tools. According to the 6 S evidence resource model, a systematic search was conducted for evidence related to the assessment, prevention, infection recognition, exudate management, dressing selection, drainage tube exit-site care, health education and follow-up of drainage-associated open surgical wounds after minimally invasive treatment for severe acute pancreatitis. The types of evidence included clinical decisions, clinical practice guidelines, expert consensus statements, evidence summaries, best practice recommendations, clinical pathways, systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The publication date of eligible evidence sources ranged from database inception to 30 September 2025. Methodological quality was appraised using AGREE II, AMSTAR 2 and the corresponding JBI critical appraisal tools. Directness was assessed separately by comparing each source with the target population and wound context.
resultsFollowing evidence retrieval, screening and quality appraisal, 11 evidence sources met the inclusion criteria, including two clinical practice guidelines, one national health industry standard, two best-practice recommendation documents, three systematic reviews or meta-analyses, one international consensus document, one practice-oriented clinical framework and one local clinical pathway/practice tool. Thirty-five evidence statements were synthesised across the domains of multidisciplinary collaboration, wound assessment, infection recognition, exudate management, periwound skin protection, dressing selection, drainage tube exit-site care, health education, follow-up and referral. Based on the synthesised evidence, a nursing decision pathway and five practical tools were developed, including a wound assessment record form, an infection grading and management card, a dressing selection matrix, a drainage tube exit-site care checklist, and a health education and follow-up plan.
conclusionThis study translated dispersed wound-care evidence into an operational nursing decision pathway and five supporting tools for drainage-associated open surgical wounds following minimally invasive treatment for severe acute pancreatitis. The pathway may support more standardised and consistent nursing decision-making; however, because the evidence was largely indirect and partly practice-oriented, local adaptation and prospective clinical validation are required before routine implementation. REGISTRATION: ES20259461.
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.