Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Comparison 1 Hydrocolloid dressing vs chlorhexidine impregnated gauze dressing, Outcome 1 Withdrawal due to wound infection.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Hydrocolloid dressing vs chlorhexidine impregnated gauze dressing, Outcome 1 Withdrawal due to wound infection.

Comparison 2 Hydrocolloid dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 1 Number of dressing changes.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Hydrocolloid dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 1 Number of dressing changes.

Comparison 2 Hydrocolloid dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 2 Level of pain.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Hydrocolloid dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 2 Level of pain.

Comparison 3 Polyurethane film dressing vs paraffin gauze dressing, Outcome 1 Wound infection.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 Polyurethane film dressing vs paraffin gauze dressing, Outcome 1 Wound infection.

Comparison 4 Polyurethane film dressing vs chlorhexidine impregnated paraffin gauze dressing, Outcome 1 Wound infection.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.1

Comparison 4 Polyurethane film dressing vs chlorhexidine impregnated paraffin gauze dressing, Outcome 1 Wound infection.

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 1 assessment of pain at baseline.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.1

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 1 assessment of pain at baseline.

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 2 pain 30 minutes after treatment.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.2

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 2 pain 30 minutes after treatment.

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 3 overall assessment of pain at end of study.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 5.3

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 3 overall assessment of pain at end of study.

Comparison 6 Silicon nylon dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 1 Number of dressing changes.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 6.1

Comparison 6 Silicon nylon dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 1 Number of dressing changes.

Comparison 7 Biosynthetic skin substitute (Biobrane) vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 1 Pain.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 7.1

Comparison 7 Biosynthetic skin substitute (Biobrane) vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 1 Pain.

Comparison 7 Biosynthetic skin substitute (Biobrane) vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 2 Need for surgery.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 7.2

Comparison 7 Biosynthetic skin substitute (Biobrane) vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 2 Need for surgery.

Comparison 8 Antimicrobial releasing biosynthetic dressings vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 1 Wound infection.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 8.1

Comparison 8 Antimicrobial releasing biosynthetic dressings vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 1 Wound infection.

Comparison 9 Silver impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 1 Pain.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 9.1

Comparison 9 Silver impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 1 Pain.

Comparison 9 Silver impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 2 Need for surgery.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 9.2

Comparison 9 Silver impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 2 Need for surgery.

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 1 Number of dressing changes.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 10.1

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 1 Number of dressing changes.

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 2 Number of infections.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 10.2

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 2 Number of infections.

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 3 Need for surgery.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 10.3

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 3 Need for surgery.

Comparison 1. Hydrocolloid dressing vs chlorhexidine impregnated gauze dressing

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Withdrawal due to wound infection Show forest plot

1

68

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.53 [0.11, 59.90]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 1. Hydrocolloid dressing vs chlorhexidine impregnated gauze dressing
Comparison 2. Hydrocolloid dressing vs silver sulphadiazine

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Number of dressing changes Show forest plot

1

42

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐18.65 [‐19.48, ‐17.82]

2 Level of pain Show forest plot

1

42

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.19 [‐1.82, ‐0.56]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 2. Hydrocolloid dressing vs silver sulphadiazine
Comparison 3. Polyurethane film dressing vs paraffin gauze dressing

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Wound infection Show forest plot

1

55

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.25 [0.23, 6.90]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 3. Polyurethane film dressing vs paraffin gauze dressing
Comparison 4. Polyurethane film dressing vs chlorhexidine impregnated paraffin gauze dressing

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Wound infection Show forest plot

1

51

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.48 [0.05, 4.98]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 4. Polyurethane film dressing vs chlorhexidine impregnated paraffin gauze dressing
Comparison 5. Hydrogel dressing vs usual care

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 assessment of pain at baseline Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

2 pain 30 minutes after treatment Show forest plot

1

118

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.79 [‐1.64, 0.06]

3 overall assessment of pain at end of study Show forest plot

1

98

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.31 [‐2.37, ‐0.25]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 5. Hydrogel dressing vs usual care
Comparison 6. Silicon nylon dressing vs silver sulphadiazine

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Number of dressing changes Show forest plot

1

66

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.49 [‐2.64, ‐0.34]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 6. Silicon nylon dressing vs silver sulphadiazine
Comparison 7. Biosynthetic skin substitute (Biobrane) vs silver sulphadiazine

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Pain Show forest plot

2

106

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐1.63 [‐2.20, ‐1.06]

2 Need for surgery Show forest plot

1

50

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.68 [0.21, 2.24]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 7. Biosynthetic skin substitute (Biobrane) vs silver sulphadiazine
Comparison 8. Antimicrobial releasing biosynthetic dressings vs silver sulphadiazine

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Wound infection Show forest plot

1

100

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.88 [0.87, 4.02]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 8. Antimicrobial releasing biosynthetic dressings vs silver sulphadiazine
Comparison 9. Silver impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Pain Show forest plot

2

70

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐2.66 [‐6.27, 0.94]

2 Need for surgery Show forest plot

1

50

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.67 [0.21, 2.08]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 9. Silver impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine
Comparison 10. Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Number of dressing changes Show forest plot

1

82

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐11.40 [‐15.66, ‐7.14]

2 Number of infections Show forest plot

1

82

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.27 [0.48, 3.34]

3 Need for surgery Show forest plot

1

82

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.68 [0.24, 1.97]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 10. Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine