Fatty acid vs other topical intervention or standard care: Proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer
Fatty acid may leads to lower pressure ulcer incidence: fatty acid vs control compound compared with other topical intervention or standard care (low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Fatty acid vs other topical intervention or standard care Pressure ulcer incidence: fatty acid vs control compound · individuals at risk of pressure ulcer development Fatty acid may leads to lower pressure ulcer incidence: fatty acid vs control compound compared with other topical intervention or standard care (low certainty). Dressings and topical agents for preventing pressure ulcers (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.42 [0.22, 0.8] | 1 study · 331 participants | Low |
Fatty acid vs other topical intervention or standard care Pressure ulcer incidence: fatty acid vs olive oil (high‐quality trials) · individuals at risk of pressure ulcer development Fatty acid showed no clear difference in pressure ulcer incidence: fatty acid vs olive oil (high‐quality… compared with other topical intervention or standard care (low certainty). Dressings and topical agents for preventing pressure ulcers (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 1.46 [0.77, 2.75] | 1 study · 831 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dressings and topical agents for preventing pressure ulcers 2018 · 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.