Primary (complete) wound closure vs no closure: Cosmesis
Primary closure showed no clear difference in cosmesis using validated cosmetic outcome score at 4 weeks Scale:… compared with no closure (moderate certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Primary closure vs no closure Cosmesis using validated cosmetic outcome score at 4 weeks Scale: Vancouver Scar Scale; lower score = better cosmesis · patients with traumatic wounds due to dog bite Primary closure showed no clear difference in cosmesis using validated cosmetic outcome score at 4 weeks Scale:… compared with no closure (moderate certainty). Primary closure versus delayed or no closure for traumatic wounds due to mammalian bite (2019) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 182 participants | Moderate |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary closure versus delayed or no closure for traumatic wounds due to mammalian bite 2019 · 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.