What do systematic reviews say?

NPWT 75 mmHg vs usual care

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Negative pressure wound therapy for open traumatic wounds 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

NPWT 125 mmHg vs NPWT 75 mmHg

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Negative pressure wound therapy for open traumatic wounds 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

NPWT 125 mmHg vs NPWT 75 mmHg

It is very uncertain whether NPWT 125 mmHg changes wound infection compared with NPWT 75 mmHg (very low certainty).

• Negative pressure wound therapy for open traumatic wounds 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.04 [0.31, 3.51]
  1 study · 251 participants
  Very low

NPWT 125 mmHg vs NPWT 75 mmHg

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Negative pressure wound therapy for open traumatic wounds 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

NPWT 125 mmHg vs NPWT 75 mmHg

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Negative pressure wound therapy for open traumatic wounds 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

NPWT 125 mmHg vs usual care

It is very uncertain whether NPWT 125 mmHg changes wound infection compared with standard care (very low certainty).

• Negative pressure wound therapy for open traumatic wounds 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.48 [0.2, 1.13]
  4 studies · 596 participants
  Very low

NPWT 125 mmHg vs NPWT 75 mmHg

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Negative pressure wound therapy for open traumatic wounds 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

NPWT 125 mmHg vs usual care

• Negative pressure wound therapy for open traumatic wounds 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 460 participants
  GRADE not reported

NPWT 125 mmHg vs usual care

• Negative pressure wound therapy for open traumatic wounds 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 151 participants
  Very low

NPWT 125 mmHg vs usual care

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Negative pressure wound therapy for open traumatic wounds 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

NPWT 125 mmHg vs usual care

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Negative pressure wound therapy for open traumatic wounds 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

NPWT 125 mmHg vs usual care

NPWT 125 mmHg showed no clear difference in wound infection compared with standard care (low certainty).

• Negative pressure wound therapy for open traumatic wounds 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.61 [0.31, 1.18]
  2 studies · 509 participants
  Low

NPWT 125 mmHg vs usual care

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Negative pressure wound therapy for open traumatic wounds 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

NPWT 125 mmHg vs usual care

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Negative pressure wound therapy for open traumatic wounds 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Adverse events with anti‐gram‐positive antibiotics vs placebo

Mortality with anti‐gram‐positive antibiotics showed no clear difference in overall mortality compared with placebo (moderate certainty).

• Empirical antibiotics targeting gram‐positive bacteria for the treatment of febrile neutropenic patients with cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.9 [0.64, 1.25]
  8 studies · 1242 participants
  Moderate

Treatment failure with anti‐gram‐positive antibiotics vs placebo

Treatment failure with anti‐gram‐positive antibiotics showed no clear difference in overall failure (disregarding modifications) compared with placebo (low certainty).

• Empirical antibiotics targeting gram‐positive bacteria for the treatment of febrile neutropenic patients with cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1 [0.79, 1.27]
  7 studies · 943 participants
  Low

Treatment failure with anti‐gram‐positive antibiotics vs placebo

It is very uncertain whether treatment failure with anti‐gram‐positive antibiotics changes failure, modifications included compared with placebo (very low certainty).

• Empirical antibiotics targeting gram‐positive bacteria for the treatment of febrile neutropenic patients with cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.72 [0.65, 0.79]
  11 studies · 2169 participants
  Very low

Adverse events with anti‐gram‐positive antibiotics vs placebo

It is very uncertain whether adverse events with anti‐gram‐positive antibiotics changes any adverse events compared with placebo (very low certainty).

• Empirical antibiotics targeting gram‐positive bacteria for the treatment of febrile neutropenic patients with cancer 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.74 [1.5, 2.01]
  9 studies · 1936 participants
  Very low

Propofol vs sodium thiopental rectal (25 mg/kg)

Propofol showed no clear difference in total control of seizures compared with thiopental sodium (low certainty).

• Propofol versus thiopental sodium for the treatment of refractory status epilepticus 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.5 [0.4, 5.61]
  1 study · 21 participants
  Low

Propofol vs sodium thiopental rectal (25 mg/kg)

Propofol showed no clear difference in in‐hospital mortality compared with thiopental sodium (low certainty).

• Propofol versus thiopental sodium for the treatment of refractory status epilepticus 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.5 [0.19, 11.93]
  1 study · 21 participants
  Low