19
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Dressings and topical agents for treating venous leg ulcers

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Venous leg ulcers are open skin wounds on the lower leg which can be slow to heal, and are both painful and costly. The point prevalence of open venous leg ulcers in the UK is about 3 cases per 10,000 people, and many people experience recurrent episodes of prolonged ulceration. First-line treatment for venous leg ulcers is compression therapy, but a wide range of dressings and topical treatments are also used. This diversity of treatments makes evidence-based decision-making challenging, and a clear and current overview of all the evidence is required. This review is a network meta-analysis (NMA) which assesses the probability of complete ulcer healing associated with alternative dressings and topical agents.

          Related collections

          Most cited references236

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Formation of the scab and the rate of epithelization of superficial wounds in the skin of the young domestic pig.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Is network meta-analysis as valid as standard pairwise meta-analysis? It all depends on the distribution of effect modifiers

            Background In the last decade, network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials has been introduced as an extension of pairwise meta-analysis. The advantage of network meta-analysis over standard pairwise meta-analysis is that it facilitates indirect comparisons of multiple interventions that have not been studied in a head-to-head fashion. Although assumptions underlying pairwise meta-analyses are well understood, those concerning network meta-analyses are perceived to be more complex and prone to misinterpretation. Discussion In this paper, we aim to provide a basic explanation when network meta-analysis is as valid as pairwise meta-analysis. We focus on the primary role of effect modifiers, which are study and patient characteristics associated with treatment effects. Because network meta-analysis includes different trials comparing different interventions, the distribution of effect modifiers cannot only vary across studies for a particular comparison (as with standard pairwise meta-analysis, causing heterogeneity), but also between comparisons (causing inconsistency). If there is an imbalance in the distribution of effect modifiers between different types of direct comparisons, the related indirect comparisons will be biased. If it can be assumed that this is not the case, network meta-analysis is as valid as pairwise meta-analysis. Summary The validity of network meta-analysis is based on the underlying assumption that there is no imbalance in the distribution of effect modifiers across the different types of direct treatment comparisons, regardless of the structure of the evidence network.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Book Chapter: not found

              Presenting Results and‘Summary of Findings’ Tables

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
                Wiley
                14651858
                June 15 2018
                Affiliations
                [1 ]University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre; Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health; Jean McFarlane Building Oxford Road Manchester UK M13 9PL
                [2 ]Independent Researcher; 7 Victoria Terrace, Kirkstall Leeds UK LS5 3HX
                [3 ]St Mary's Hospital; Leeds Community Healthcare NHS Trust; 3 Greenhill Road Leeds UK LS12 3QE
                [4 ]University of York; Centre for Health Economics; Alcuin 'A' Block Heslington York UK YO10 5DD
                Article
                10.1002/14651858.CD012583.pub2
                6513558
                29906322
                bc5e3612-3fbe-4479-8aa9-ecebd0128769
                © 2018
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article