Cochrane · systematic review · CD013530
Pressure‐garment therapy for preventing hypertrophic scarring after burn injury
Harris, IM, Lee, KC, Deeks, JJ, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2024 · Cochrane Library
WoundsAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
49
current version
GRADE rated
35
No studies
13
Included studies
NR
No studies 13 · 26.5%Ungraded 1 · 2%Very low 35 · 71.4%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) versus no treatment/lanolin
Population: people with burn wounds likely to develop hypertrophic scarring
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Scar improvement (VSS) (0–13, higher score = more severe scarring) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) vs no treatment/lanolin | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 187 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Scar improvement (POSAS) (0–10, higher score = more severe scarring) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) vs no treatment/lanolin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pain (VAS 0–10, higher score = more severe pain) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) vs no treatment/lanolin | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 104 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Pruritus (VAS 0–10, higher score = more severe pruritus) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) vs no treatment/lanolin | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 104 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Quality of life Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) vs no treatment/lanolin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse events Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) vs no treatment/lanolin | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 1 participants | Ungraded |
Adherence Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) vs no treatment/lanolin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) versus silicone
Population: people with burn wounds likely to develop hypertrophic scarring
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Scar improvement (VSS) (0–13, higher score = more severe scarring) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) vs silicone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 96 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Scar improvement (POSAS) (0–10, higher score = more severe scarring) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) vs silicone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 159 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Pain (POSAS 0–10, higher score = more severe pain, VAS 0–10, higher score = more severe pruritus) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) vs silicone | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 263 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Pruritus (POSAS 0–10, higher score = more severe pruritus; TPIS 0–3, higher score = more severe pruritus; VAS 0–10, higher score = more severe pruritus) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) vs silicone | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 263 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Quality of life (CHU‐9D 0–1, with 1 representing full health; BBSIP 0–5, higher scores = more severe impact) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) vs silicone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 159 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse events Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) vs silicone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 159 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adherence Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) vs silicone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 159 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus silicone versus no treatment/lanolin
Population: people with burn wounds likely to develop hypertrophic scarring
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Scar improvement (VSS) (0–13, higher score = more severe scarring) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus silicone vs no treatment/lanolin | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 96 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Scar improvement (POSAS) (0–10, higher score = more severe scarring) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus silicone vs no treatment/lanolin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pain (VAS 0–10, higher score = more severe pain) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus silicone vs no treatment/lanolin | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 104 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Pruritus (VAS 0–10, higher score = more severe pruritus) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus silicone vs no treatment/lanolin | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 104 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Quality of life Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus silicone vs no treatment/lanolin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse events Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus silicone vs no treatment/lanolin | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 104 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Adherence Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus silicone vs no treatment/lanolin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus silicone versus silicone
Population: people with burn wounds likely to develop hypertrophic scarring
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Scar improvement (VSS) (0–13, higher score = more severe scarring) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus silicone vs silicone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 96 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Scar improvement (POSAS) (0–10, higher score = more severe scarring) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus silicone vs silicone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 159 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Pain (POSAS 0–10, higher score = more severe pain) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus silicone vs silicone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 159 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Pruritus (POSAS 0–10, higher score = more severe pruritus; TPIS 0–3, higher score = more severe pruritus; VAS 0–10, higher score = more severe pruritus) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus silicone vs silicone | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 263 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Quality of life (CHU‐9D 0–1, with 1 representing full health; BBSIP 0–5, higher scores = more severe impact) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus silicone vs silicone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 159 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse events Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus silicone vs silicone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 159 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adherence Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus silicone vs silicone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 159 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus scar management therapy including silicone versus scar management therapy including silicone
Population: people with burn wounds likely to develop hypertrophic scarring
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Scar improvement (VSS) (0–14, higher score = more severe scarring) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus scar management therapy including silicone vs scar management therapy including silicone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 88 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Scar improvement (POSAS) (0–10, higher score = more severe scarring) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus scar management therapy including silicone vs scar management therapy including silicone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 88 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Pain (POSAS 0–10, higher score = more severe pain) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus scar management therapy including silicone vs scar management therapy including silicone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 88 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Pruritus (POSAS 0–10, higher score = more severe pruritus) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus scar management therapy including silicone vs scar management therapy including silicone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 88 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Quality of life (EQ‐5D‐5L 0–1, with 1 representing full health) Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus scar management therapy including silicone vs scar management therapy including silicone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 88 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse events Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus scar management therapy including silicone vs scar management therapy including silicone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 88 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adherence Pressure‐garment therapy (PGT) plus scar management therapy including silicone vs scar management therapy including silicone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 88 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
High‐pressure garment therapy versus low‐pressure garment therapy
Population: people with burn wounds likely to develop hypertrophic scarring
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Scar improvement (VSS) (0–13, higher score = more severe scarring) High‐pressure garment therapy vs low‐pressure garment therapy | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 58 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Scar improvement (POSAS) (0–10, higher score = more severe scarring) High‐pressure garment therapy vs low‐pressure garment therapy | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pain High‐pressure garment therapy vs low‐pressure garment therapy | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Pruritus High‐pressure garment therapy vs low‐pressure garment therapy | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Quality of life High‐pressure garment therapy vs low‐pressure garment therapy | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse events High‐pressure garment therapy vs low‐pressure garment therapy | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 60 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Adherence High‐pressure garment therapy vs low‐pressure garment therapy | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 67 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Different types of pressure garment (Caroskin Tricot plus an adhesive silicone gel sheet versus Gecko Nanoplast (silicone gel bandage))
Population: people with burn wounds likely to develop hypertrophic scarring
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Scar improvement (VSS) (0–13, higher score = more severe scarring) Different types of pressure garment (Caroskin Tricot plus an adhesive silicone gel sheet vs Gecko Nanoplast (silicone gel bandage)) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Scar improvement (POSAS) (0–10, higher score = more severe scarring) Different types of pressure garment (Caroskin Tricot plus an adhesive silicone gel sheet vs Gecko Nanoplast (silicone gel bandage)) | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 60 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Pain (POSAS 0–10, higher score = more severe pain) Different types of pressure garment (Caroskin Tricot plus an adhesive silicone gel sheet vs Gecko Nanoplast (silicone gel bandage)) | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 60 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Pruritus (POSAS 0–10, higher score = more severe pruritus) Different types of pressure garment (Caroskin Tricot plus an adhesive silicone gel sheet vs Gecko Nanoplast (silicone gel bandage)) | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 60 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Quality of life Different types of pressure garment (Caroskin Tricot plus an adhesive silicone gel sheet vs Gecko Nanoplast (silicone gel bandage)) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse events Different types of pressure garment (Caroskin Tricot plus an adhesive silicone gel sheet vs Gecko Nanoplast (silicone gel bandage)) | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 60 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Adherence Different types of pressure garment (Caroskin Tricot plus an adhesive silicone gel sheet vs Gecko Nanoplast (silicone gel bandage)) | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |