Negative pressure wound therapy vs standard dressing: Haematoma (proportion of participants in each group with haematoma;
It is very uncertain whether negative pressure wound therapy changes haematoma (proportion of participants in each group with haematoma; compared with standard dressing (very low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Negative pressure wound therapy vs standard dressing Haematoma (proportion of participants in each group with haematoma; · adult patients with surgical wounds healing by primary closure It is very uncertain whether negative pressure wound therapy changes haematoma (proportion of participants in each group with haematoma; compared with standard dressing (very low certainty). Negative pressure wound therapy for surgical wounds healing by primary closure (2022) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.79 [0.48, 1.3] | 17 studies · 5909 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Negative pressure wound therapy for surgical wounds healing by primary closure 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.