This is not the most recent version of the article. View current version (7 OCT 2014)

Intervention Review

You have free access to this content

Negative pressure wound therapy for skin grafts and surgical wounds healing by primary intention

  1. Joan Webster1,2,3,*,
  2. Paul Scuffham4,
  3. Karen L Sherriff5,
  4. Monica Stankiewicz6,
  5. Wendy P Chaboyer5

Editorial Group: Cochrane Wounds Group

Published Online: 18 APR 2012

Assessed as up-to-date: 18 NOV 2011

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009261.pub2


How to Cite

Webster J, Scuffham P, Sherriff KL, Stankiewicz M, Chaboyer WP. Negative pressure wound therapy for skin grafts and surgical wounds healing by primary intention. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD009261. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009261.pub2.

Author Information

  1. 1

    Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Centre for Clinical Nursing, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

  2. 2

    Griffith University, NHMRC Centre for Research Excellence in Nursing, Centre for Health Practice Innovation, Griffith Health Institute, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

  3. 3

    University of Queensland, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

  4. 4

    Griffith University, Meadowbrook, Australia

  5. 5

    Griffith University, NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Nursing, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

  6. 6

    Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Specialist Outpatient Department, Herston, Queensland, Australia

*Joan Webster, joan_webster@health.qld.gov.au.

Publication History

  1. Publication Status: Edited (no change to conclusions)
  2. Published Online: 18 APR 2012

SEARCH

This is not the most recent version of the article. View current version (07 OCT 2014)

[Figure 1]
Figure 1. Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
[Analysis 1.1]
Analysis 1.1. Comparison 1 Negative pressure versus standard dressing, Outcome 1 Adverse events.
[Analysis 1.2]
Analysis 1.2. Comparison 1 Negative pressure versus standard dressing, Outcome 2 Fracture blisters.
[Analysis 1.3]
Analysis 1.3. Comparison 1 Negative pressure versus standard dressing, Outcome 3 Seroma.
[Analysis 2.1]
Analysis 2.1. Comparison 2 Negative pressure GSUC versus negative pressure VAC, Outcome 1 Adverse events.