Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

清潔手術 (clean surgery) 中用以預防手術傷口感染的一次性外科口罩

Información

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002929.pub3Copiar DOI
Base de datos:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Versión publicada:
  1. 26 abril 2016see what's new
Tipo:
  1. Intervention
Etapa:
  1. Review
Grupo Editorial Cochrane:
  1. Grupo Cochrane de Heridas

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2016 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cifras del artículo

Altmetric:

Citado por:

Citado 0 veces por enlace Crossref Cited-by

Contraer

Autores

  • Marina Vincent

    Correspondencia a: Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK

    [email protected]

    [email protected]

  • Peggy Edwards

    C/o Cochrane Wounds, School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK

Contributions of authors

Peggy Edwards identified studies from the initial search and selected studies independently for data extraction, devised the data extraction sheet, independently extracted the data from studies, drafted the protocol and the review jointly with Allyson Lipp, provided content expertise and agreed with the update of the review.

Marina Vincent undertook the seventh update of this review, screened the search output and updated the text and plain language summary.

Contributions of editorial base

Nicky Cullum: edited the review, advised on methodology, interpretation and review content. Approved the final review and review update prior to submission.
Sally Bell‐Syer: co‐ordinated the editorial process. Advised on methodology, interpretation and content. Edited the review and the updated review.
Ruth Foxlee: designed the search strategy, ran the searches and edited the search methods section for previous updates.
Rachel Richardson: checked previous review updates prior to submission.
Reetu Child: ran the searches and checked the search strategy for this update.

Sources of support

Internal sources

  • Faculty of Health, Sport and Science University of Glamorgan, UK.

External sources

  • Theatre Nursing Trust Fund, UK.

  • National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), UK.

  • This project was supported by the National Institute for Health Research via Cochrane Infrastructure funding to Cochrane Wounds. The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Systematic Reviews Programme, NIHR, NHS or the Department of Health, UK.

Declarations of interest

Marina Vincent: none known.
Peggy Edwards: none known.

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Alun Davies, Lorraine Foster, Michael Walker, Anne Humphreys and Pearl Shahib who refereed the protocol for relevance, readability and rigour. Thanks also to Vicky Arrowsmith, Sue Clark, Alun Davies, Michael Walker and Pearl Shahib who refereed the review and Jenny Bellorini who copy edited the recent updated review. We would like to thank Nicky Cullum and Andrea Nelson for methodological advice, Sally Bell‐Syer for her support and the Cochrane Wounds Group for their help and assistance.

Allyson Lipp was the originator of this review and was responsible for the development of the protocol, the review and all updates to the present time. She has now retired and has stepped away from her author role. We would like to acknowledge her substantial involvement in this systematic review.

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2016 Apr 26

Disposable surgical face masks for preventing surgical wound infection in clean surgery

Review

Marina Vincent, Peggy Edwards

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002929.pub3

2014 Feb 17

Disposable surgical face masks for preventing surgical wound infection in clean surgery

Review

Allyson Lipp, Peggy Edwards

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002929.pub2

2002 Jan 21

Disposable surgical face masks for preventing surgical wound infection in clean surgery

Review

Allyson Lipp, Peggy Edwards

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD002929

Keywords

MeSH

Medical Subject Headings Check Words

Humans;

PICO

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

El uso y la enseñanza del modelo PICO están muy extendidos en el ámbito de la atención sanitaria basada en la evidencia para formular preguntas y estrategias de búsqueda y para caracterizar estudios o metanálisis clínicos. PICO son las siglas en inglés de cuatro posibles componentes de una pregunta de investigación: paciente, población o problema; intervención; comparación; desenlace (outcome).

Para saber más sobre el uso del modelo PICO, puede consultar el Manual Cochrane.

Methodological quality graph: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Methodological quality graph: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Methodological quality summary: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item for each included study.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

Methodological quality summary: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item for each included study.

Comparison 1 Masks versus no masks, Outcome 1 Wound infection.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Masks versus no masks, Outcome 1 Wound infection.

Comparison 1. Masks versus no masks

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Wound infection Show forest plot

3

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

Totals not selected

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Masks versus no masks