Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

敷料处理浅表烧伤及深二度烧伤

Appendices

Appendix 1. Search methods from the original version ‐ 2008

We conducted searches of the following databases:

  • The Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 29 May 2008)

  • The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) ‐ The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 2

  • Ovid MEDLINE ‐ 1950 to May Week 3 2008

  • Ovid EMBASE ‐ 1980 to 2008 Week 21

  • Ovid CINAHL ‐ 1982 to May Week 4 2008

The following search strategy was used in CENTRAL and modified as appropriate for other databases:

#1 MeSH descriptor Bandages, Hydrocolloid explode all trees
#2 hydrocolloid* or askina or biofilm or combiderm or comfeel or cutinova or duoderm or duoderm or (hydroactive NEXT gel*) or granuflex or hydrocoll or replicare or tegasorb or sureskin or hydrofibre or hydrofiber or aquacel
# 3MeSH descriptor Alginates explode all trees
#4 alginate NEXT dressing*
#5 alginate* or calcium or algosteril or kaltostat or melgisorb or seasorb or sorbalgon or sorbsan or tegagen or “algisite M”
#6 foam NEXT dressing*
#7 allevyn or avance or biatain or cavi‐care or flexipore or lyofoam or spyrosorb or tielle or mepilex
#8 MeSH descriptor Hydrogels explode all trees
#9 hydrogel* or aquaform or debrisan or geliperm or granugel or hydrosorb or novogel or nu‐gel or "nu gel" or purilon or sterigel
#10 film or films or arglaes or omiderm or polyurethane or tegaderm or opsite
#11 MeSH descriptor Occlusive Dressings explode all trees
#12 paraffin NEAR gauze
#13 paranet or paratulle or unitulle or jelonet or bactigras or cuticerin or adaptic or atrauman
#14 "retention tape" or hypafix or mefix or fixamul
#15 biosynthetic NEAR substitute*
#16 (biosynthetic NEAR dressing*)
#17 transcyte or biobrane
#18 (antimicrobial NEXT dressing*) or acticoat
#19 (#1 OR #2 OR #3 OR #4 OR #5 OR #6 OR #7 OR #8 OR #9 OR #10 OR #11 OR #12 OR #13 OR #14 OR #15 OR #16 OR #17 OR #18)

The MEDLINE search was combined with the Cochrane Highly Sensitive Search Strategy for identifying randomised trials in MEDLINE: sensitivity‐ and precision‐maximising version (2008 revision); Ovid format. The EMBASE and CINAHL searches were combined with the trial filters developed by the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. No date or language restrictions were applied.

We handsearched the references of all identified studies and contacted authors for information about other published and unpublished studies. All dressing manufacturers were contacted to request information on trials evaluating dressings.

Appendix 2. Ovid MEDLINE search strategy

1 exp Bandages, Hydrocolloid/
2 (hydrocolloid$ or askina or biofilm or combiderm or comfeel or cutinova or duoderm or duoderm or hydroactive gel$ or granuflex or hydrocoll or replicare or tegasorb or sureskin or hydrofibre or hydrofiber or aquacel).tw.
3 exp Alginates/
4 alginate dressing$.tw.
5 (alginate$ or calcium or algosteril or kaltostat or melgisorb or seasorb or sorbalgon or sorbsan or tegagen or algisite M).tw.
6 foam dressing$.tw.
7 (allevyn or avance or biatain or cavi‐care or flexipore or lyofoam or spyrosorb or tielle or mepilex).tw.
8 exp Hydrogels/
9 (hydrogel$ or aquaform or debrisan or geliperm or granugel or hydrosorb or novogel or nu‐gel or purilon or sterigel).tw.
10 (film or films or arglaes or omiderm or polyurethane or tegaderm or opsite).tw.
11 exp Occlusive Dressings/
12 (paraffin adj10 gauze).tw.
13 (paranet or paratulle or unitulle or jelonet or bactigras or cuticerin or adaptic or atrauman).tw.
14 (retention tape or hypafix or mefix or fixamul).tw.
15 (biosynthetic adj10 substitute$).tw.
16 (biosynthetic adj10 dressing$).tw.
17 (biobrane or transcyte).tw.
18 (antimicrobial dressing$ or acticoat).tw.
19 or/1‐18
20 exp Burns/
21 (burn or burns or burned).tw.
22 or/20‐21
23 19 and 22

Appendix 3. Ovid EMBASE search strategy

1 exp Hydrocolloid Dressing/
2 (hydrocolloid$ or askina or biofilm or combiderm or comfeel or cutinova or duoderm or duoderm or hydroactive gel$ or granuflex or hydrocoll or replicare or tegasorb or sureskin or hydrofibre or hydrofiber or aquacel).tw.
3 exp Calcium Alginate/
4 alginate dressing$.tw.
5 (alginate$ or calcium or algosteril or kaltostat or melgisorb or seasorb or sorbalgon or sorbsan or tegagen or algisite M).tw.
6 foam dressing$.tw.
7 (allevyn or avance or biatain or cavi‐care or flexipore or lyofoam or spyrosorb or tielle or mepilex).tw.
8 exp Hydrogel/
9 (hydrogel$ or aquaform or debrisan or geliperm or granugel or hydrosorb or novogel or nu‐gel or purilon or sterigel).tw.
10 (film or films or arglaes or omiderm or polyurethane or tegaderm or opsite).tw.
11 occlusive dressing$.tw.
12 (paraffin adj10 gauze).tw.
13 (paranet or paratulle or unitulle or jelonet or bactigras or cuticerin or adaptic or atrauman).tw.
14 (retention tape or hypafix or mefix or fixamul).tw.
15 exp Biobrane/
16 (biosynthetic adj10 substitute$).tw.
17 (biosynthetic adj10 dressing$).tw.
18 (biobrane or transcyte).tw.
19 (antimicrobial dressing$ or acticoat).tw.
20 or/1‐19
21 exp Burn/
22 (burn or burns or burned).tw.
23 or/21‐22
24 20 and 23

Appendix 4. EBSCO CINAHL search strategy

S25 S21 and S24
S24 S22 or S23
S23 TI ( burn or burns or burned ) or AB ( burn or burns or burned )
S22 (MH "Burns+")
S21 S1 or S2 or S3 or S4 or S5 or S6 or S7 or S8 or S9 or S10 or S11 or S12 or S13 or S14 or S15 or S16 or S17 or S18 or S19 or S20
S20 TI ( antimicrobial dressing* or acticoat ) or AB ( antimicrobial dressing* or acticoat )
S19 (MH "Antimicrobial Dressings")
S18 (MH "Antimicrobial Dressings")
S17 TI ( biobrane or transcyte ) or AB ( biobrane or transcyte )
S16 TI biosynthetic N10 dressing* or AB biosynthetic N10 dressing*
S15 TI biosynthetic N10 substitute* or AB biosynthetic N10 substitute*
S14 TI ( retention tape or hypafix or mefix or fixamul ) or AB ( retention tape or hypafix or mefix or fixamul )
S13 TI ( paranet or paratulle or unitulle or jelonet or bactigras or cuticerin or adaptic or atrauman ) or AB ( paranet or paratulle or unitulle or jelonet or bactigras or cuticerin or adaptic or atrauman )
S12 TI paraffin N10 gauze or AB paraffin N10 gauze
S11 (MH "Gauze Dressings")
S10 (MH "Occlusive Dressings")
S9 TI ( film or films or arglaes or omiderm or polyurethane or tegaderm or opsite ) or AB ( film or films or arglaes or omiderm or polyurethane or tegaderm or opsite )
S8 TI ( hydrogel* or aquaform or debrisan or geliperm or granugel or hydrosorb or novogel or nu‐gel or purilon or sterigel ) or AB ( hydrogel* or aquaform or debrisan or geliperm or granugel or hydrosorb or novogel or nu‐gel or purilon or sterigel )
S7 (MH "Hydrogel Dressings")
S6 TI ( allevyn or avance or biatain or cavi‐care or flexipore or lyofoam or spyrosorb or tielle or mepilex ) or AB ( allevyn or avance or biatain or cavi‐care or flexipore or lyofoam or spyrosorb or tielle or mepilex )
S5 (MH "Foam Dressings")
S4 TI ( alginate* or calcium or algosteril or kaltostat or melgisorb or seasorb or sorbalgon or sorbsan or tegagen or algisite M ) or AB ( alginate* or calcium or algosteril or kaltostat or melgisorb or seasorb or sorbalgon or sorbsan or tegagen or algisite M )
S3 (MH "Alginates")
S2 TI ( hydrocolloid* or askina or biofilm or combiderm or comfeel or cutinova or duoderm or duoderm or hydroactive gel* or granuflex or hydrocoll or replicare or tegasorb or sureskin or hydrofibre or hydrofiber or aquacel ) or AB ( hydrocolloid* or askina or biofilm or combiderm or comfeel or cutinova or duoderm or duoderm or hydroactive gel* or granuflex or hydrocoll or replicare or tegasorb or sureskin or hydrofibre or hydrofiber or aquacel )
S1 (MH "Hydrocolloid Dressings")

'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

'Risk of bias' graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

'Risk of bias' graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Comparison 1 Hydrocolloid dressing vs chlorhexidine‐impregnated gauze dressing, Outcome 1 Withdrawal due to wound infection.
Figuras y tablas -
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.
Figuras y tablas -
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.
Figuras y tablas -
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.
Figuras y tablas -
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.
Figuras y tablas -
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 Wound healing: number of people healed at 6 days.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.1

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 1 Wound healing: number of people healed at 6 days.

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 2 Wound healing: number of people healed at 9 days.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.2

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 2 Wound healing: number of people healed at 9 days.

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 3 Wound healing: number of people healed at 21 days.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.3

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 3 Wound healing: number of people healed at 21 days.

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 4 Wound healing: number of people healed at 12 days.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.4

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 4 Wound healing: number of people healed at 12 days.

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 5 Wound healing: number of people healed at 15 days.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.5

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 5 Wound healing: number of people healed at 15 days.

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 6 Wound healing: number of people healed at 18 days.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.6

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 6 Wound healing: number of people healed at 18 days.

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 7 Assessment of pain at baseline.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.7

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 7 Assessment of pain at baseline.

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 8 Pain 30 minutes after treatment.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.8

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 8 Pain 30 minutes after treatment.

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 9 Overall assessment of pain at end of study.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.9

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 9 Overall assessment of pain at end of study.

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 10 Infection with Pseudomonas aeruginosa requiring antibiotic therapy.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.10

Comparison 5 Hydrogel dressing vs usual care, Outcome 10 Infection with Pseudomonas aeruginosa requiring antibiotic therapy.

Comparison 6 Silicon nylon dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 1 Number of dressing changes.
Figuras y tablas -
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.
Figuras y tablas -
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.
Figuras y tablas -
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.
Figuras y tablas -
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 Wound healing time (days).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.1

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 1 Wound healing time (days).

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 2 Wound healing: number of people healed at 7 days.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.2

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 2 Wound healing: number of people healed at 7 days.

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 3 Wound healing: number of people healed at 10 days.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.3

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 3 Wound healing: number of people healed at 10 days.

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 4 Wound healing: number of people healed at 15 days.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.4

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 4 Wound healing: number of people healed at 15 days.

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 5 Wound healing: number of people healed at 17 days.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.5

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 5 Wound healing: number of people healed at 17 days.

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 6 Wound healing: number of people healed at 21 days.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.6

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 6 Wound healing: number of people healed at 21 days.

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 7 Healing rate (% wound area).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.7

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 7 Healing rate (% wound area).

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 8 Pain.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.8

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 8 Pain.

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 9 Need for surgery.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.9

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

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 10 Number of infections.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.10

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 10 Number of infections.

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 11 Number of wound dressings.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.11

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 11 Number of wound dressings.

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 12 Nursing time (minutes).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 9.12

Comparison 9 Silver‐impregnated dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 12 Nursing time (minutes).

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 1 Wound healing time (days).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.1

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 1 Wound healing time (days).

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 2 Pain at day 1.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.2

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 2 Pain at day 1.

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 3 Pain at day 3.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.3

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 3 Pain at day 3.

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 4 Pain at day 7.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.4

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 4 Pain at day 7.

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 5 Number of dressing changes.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.5

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 5 Number of dressing changes.

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 6 Number of infections.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.6

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 6 Number of infections.

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 7 Need for surgery.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 10.7

Comparison 10 Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine, Outcome 7 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]

Figuras y tablas -
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 [‐22.54, ‐14.76]

2 Level of pain Show forest plot

1

42

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.19 [‐1.82, ‐0.56]

Figuras y tablas -
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]

Figuras y tablas -
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]

Figuras y tablas -
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 Wound healing: number of people healed at 6 days Show forest plot

1

80

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.5 [0.46, 4.91]

2 Wound healing: number of people healed at 9 days Show forest plot

1

80

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.0 [1.08, 3.72]

3 Wound healing: number of people healed at 21 days Show forest plot

1

80

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.0 [0.95, 1.05]

4 Wound healing: number of people healed at 12 days Show forest plot

1

80

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.68 [1.17, 2.42]

5 Wound healing: number of people healed at 15 days Show forest plot

1

80

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.16 [0.95, 1.41]

6 Wound healing: number of people healed at 18 days Show forest plot

1

80

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.08 [0.97, 1.21]

7 Assessment of pain at baseline Show forest plot

1

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

8 Pain 30 minutes after treatment Show forest plot

1

118

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.79 [‐1.64, 0.06]

9 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]

10 Infection with Pseudomonas aeruginosa requiring antibiotic therapy Show forest plot

1

80

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.33 [0.01, 7.95]

Figuras y tablas -
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]

Figuras y tablas -
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]

Figuras y tablas -
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]

Figuras y tablas -
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 Wound healing time (days) Show forest plot

2

169

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐4.22 [‐5.92, ‐2.52]

2 Wound healing: number of people healed at 7 days Show forest plot

1

104

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.5 [0.58, 3.91]

3 Wound healing: number of people healed at 10 days Show forest plot

1

104

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.82 [0.97, 3.40]

4 Wound healing: number of people healed at 15 days Show forest plot

2

270

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.17 [1.02, 1.35]

5 Wound healing: number of people healed at 17 days Show forest plot

1

104

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.23 [0.98, 1.54]

6 Wound healing: number of people healed at 21 days Show forest plot

1

104

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.21 [1.06, 1.37]

7 Healing rate (% wound area) Show forest plot

1

166

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.21 [‐2.37, 6.79]

8 Pain Show forest plot

3

135

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐2.84 [‐5.89, 0.21]

9 Need for surgery Show forest plot

1

50

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.67 [0.21, 2.08]

10 Number of infections Show forest plot

4

348

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.04 [0.64, 1.67]

11 Number of wound dressings Show forest plot

1

65

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐11.07 [‐19.58, ‐2.56]

12 Nursing time (minutes) Show forest plot

1

65

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐4.82 [‐19.42, 9.78]

Figuras y tablas -
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 Wound healing time (days) Show forest plot

1

70

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐3.70 [‐5.44, ‐1.96]

2 Pain at day 1 Show forest plot

1

70

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐2.0 [‐3.03, ‐0.97]

3 Pain at day 3 Show forest plot

1

70

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐3.1 [‐4.02, ‐2.18]

4 Pain at day 7 Show forest plot

1

70

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐2.4 [‐3.18, ‐1.62]

5 Number of dressing changes Show forest plot

1

82

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐11.40 [‐15.66, ‐7.14]

6 Number of infections Show forest plot

1

82

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.27 [0.48, 3.34]

7 Need for surgery Show forest plot

1

82

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.68 [0.24, 1.97]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 10. Fibre dressing vs silver sulphadiazine