BackgroundHyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) is used to treat various wound types. However, the possible beneficial and harmful effects of HBOT for acute wounds are unclear.MethodsWe undertook a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of HBOT compared to other interventions on wound healing and adverse effects in patients with acute wounds. To detect all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) we searched five relevant databases up to March 2010. Trial selection, quality assessment, data extraction, and data synthesis were conducted by two of the authors independently.ResultsWe included five trials, totaling 360 patients. These trials, with some methodologic flaws, included different kinds of wound and focused on different outcome parameters, which prohibited meta-analysis. A French trial (n = 36 patients) reported that significantly more crush wounds healed with HBOT than with sham HBOT [relative risk (RR) 1.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11–2.61]. Moreover, there were significantly fewer additional surgical procedures required with HBOT (RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.03–2.50), and there was significantly less tissue necrosis (RR 1.70, 95% CI 1.11–2.61). In one of two American trials (n = 141) burn wounds healed significantly quicker with HBOT (P < 0.005) than with routine burn care. A British trial (n = 48) compared HBOT with usual care. HBOT resulted in a significantly higher percentage of healthy graft area in split skin grafts (RR 3.50, 95% CI 1.35–9.11). In a Chinese trial (n = 145) HBOT did not significantly improve flap survival in patients with limb skin defects.ConclusionsHBOT, if readily available, appears effective for the management of acute, difficult to heal wounds.
Objectives: Participation is considerably restricted in children and adolescents with acquired brain injury (ABI) as compared to their healthy peers. This systematic review aims to identify which factors are associated with participation in children and adolescents with ABI. Methods: A systematic search in Medline and various other electronic databases from January 2001–November 2014 was performed. All clinical studies describing determinants of participation at least 1 year after the diagnosis of ABI by means of one or more pre-defined instruments in patients up to 18 years of age were included. Extracted data included study characteristics, patient characteristics, participation outcome and determinants of participation (categorized into: health conditions (including characteristics of ABI), body functions and structures, activities, personal factors and environmental factors). The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated based on three quality aspects (selection, information and statistical analysis bias) and scored as low, moderate or high. Results: Eight studies using an explicit participation outcome measure were selected after review, including a total of 1863 patients, with a follow-up ranging from 1 up to 288 months. Three studies included patients with a traumatic or a non-traumatic brain injury (TBI or NTBI) and five studies with only TBI patients. Factors consistently found to be associated with more participation restrictions were: greater severity of ABI, impaired motor, cognitive, behavioural and/or sensory functioning, limited accessibility of the physical environmentand worse family functioning. Fewer participation problems were associated with a supportive/nurturing parenting style, higher household income, acceptance and support in the community and availability of special programmes. The overall methodological quality of the included studies was high in two and moderate in six studies. Conclusion: This systematic review shows that only a few, moderate quality, studies on the determinants of participation after paediatric ABI using recommended explicit measurement instruments are available. Various components of the ICF model: health condition, body functions and structures and environmental factors were consistently found to be associated with participation. More methodologically sound studies, using the recommended explicit outcome measures, a standardized set of potential determinants and longterm follow-up are suggested to increase the knowledge on participation in children and youth with ABI.
BACKGROUND: The evidence on prophylactic use of negative pressure wound therapy on primary closed incisional wounds (iNPWT) for the prevention of surgical site infections (SSI) is confusing and ambiguous. Implementation in daily practice is impaired by inconsistent recommendations in current international guidelines and published meta-analyses. More recently, multiple new randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been published. We aimed to provide an overview of all meta-analyses and their characteristics; to conduct a new and up-to-date systematic review and meta-analysis and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment; and to explore the additive value of new RCTs with a trial sequential analysis (TSA).METHODS: PubMed, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL databases were searched from database inception to October 24, 2022. We identified existing meta-analyses covering all surgical specialties and RCTs studying the effect of iNPWT compared with standard dressings in all types of surgery on the incidence of SSI, wound dehiscence, reoperation, seroma, hematoma, mortality, readmission rate, skin blistering, skin necrosis, pain, and adverse effects of the intervention. We calculated relative risks (RR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model. We assessed publication bias with a comparison-adjusted funnel plot. TSA was used to assess the risk of random error. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias-2 (RoB2) tool and GRADE approach. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022312995.FINDINGS: We identified eight previously published general meta-analyses investigating iNPWT and compared their results to present meta-analysis. For the updated systematic review, 57 RCTs with 13,744 patients were included in the quantitative analysis for SSI, yielding a RR of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.59-0.76, I 2 = 21%) for iNPWT compared with standard dressing. Certainty of evidence was high. Compared with previous meta-analyses, the RR stabilised, and the confidence interval narrowed. In the TSA, the cumulative Z-curve crossed the trial sequential monitoring boundary for benefit, confirming the robustness of the summary effect estimate from the meta-analysis. INTERPRETATION: In this up-to-date meta-analysis, GRADE assessment shows high-certainty evidence that iNPWT is effective in reducing SSI, and uncertainty is less than in previous meta-analyses. TSA indicated that further trials are unlikely to change the effect estimate for the outcome SSI; therefore, if future research is to be conducted on iNPWT, it is crucial to consider what the findings will contribute to the existing robust evidence.FUNDING: Dutch Association for Quality Funds Medical Specialists.
