ArticleSICOT-J2026
Indian expert consensus on prophylactic incisional single-use negative pressure wound therapy in hip and knee arthroplasty: A modified Delphi study.
Article in SICOT-J, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSurgical site complications remain an important cause of morbidity following total hip and knee arthroplasty. While international guidelines support the selective use of prophylactic single-use negative pressure wound therapy (sNPWT) in appropriately selected high-risk patients and surgical incisions, these recommendations are largely derived from studies performed in highly standardized healthcare environments. Differences in patient characteristics, healthcare delivery, perioperative pathways, resource utilization, and postoperative surveillance may influence their applicability across diverse healthcare systems. Consequently, pragmatic, context-specific recommendations are needed to translate the available evidence into routine clinical practice in India and other countries with similar healthcare settings.
methodsA modified Delphi process was conducted involving 10 experienced arthroplasty surgeons from across India. An exploratory meeting identified key clinical questions and developed candidate statements. Subsequently, nine experts independently evaluated 13 statements using anonymous four-point Likert-scale voting. Consensus was predefined as ≥75% agreement.
resultsTwelve of the 13 candidate statements achieved consensus (agreement 77.8%-100%). The expert panel agreed that prophylactic sNPWT may be considered in selected high-risk situations, including revision arthroplasty involving implant removal, prolonged operative time (>120 min), morbid obesity (BMI > 40 kg/m
conclusionThis modified Delphi consensus translates the available evidence and collective expert experience into practical recommendations for the selective use of prophylactic sNPWT following hip and knee arthroplasty. By providing a structured framework for patient selection and application, it aims to support consistent, evidence-informed decision-making in routine clinical practice, particularly in healthcare settings where context-specific implementation of international recommendations is required. Prospective clinical and health economic studies are needed to further validate these recommendations.
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.