Ref (type) | Population | Outcome, Interventions | Results and statistical analysis | Effect size | Favours |
Adverse effects | |||||
[53]
Systematic review |
18 people Data from 1 RCT |
Adverse effects
3/18 (17%) wounds with topical negative pressure No data with usual care |
Significance not assessed |
||
[53]
Systematic review |
24 people Data from 1 RCT |
Pain
with topical negative pressure with simple foam dressing |
Significance not assessed |
||
[55]
RCT |
60 people with venous or arteriovenous ulcers of at least 6 months' duration |
Erysipelas
1 with topical negative pressure vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) 0 with control (conventional wound care techniques) |
Reported as not significant P value not reported |
Not significant | |
[55]
RCT |
60 people with venous or arteriovenous ulcers of at least 6 months' duration |
Pain
3 with topical negative pressure VAC 1 with control (conventional wound care techniques) |
P value not reported |
||
[55]
RCT |
60 people with venous or arteriovenous ulcers of at least 6 months' duration |
Wound infection
0 with topical negative pressure VAC 1 with control (conventional wound care techniques) |
P value not reported |
||
[55]
RCT |
60 people with venous or arteriovenous ulcers of at least 6 months' duration |
Postoperative bleeding at donor site
0 with topical negative pressure VAC 2 with control (conventional wound care techniques) |
P value not reported |
||
[55]
RCT |
60 people with venous or arteriovenous ulcers of at least 6 months' duration |
Non-healing ulcers
1 with topical negative pressure VAC 1 with control (conventional wound care techniques) |
P value not reported |
||
[55]
RCT |
60 people with venous or arteriovenous ulcers of at least 6 months' duration |
Cutaneous damage secondary to treatment
7 with topical negative pressure VAC 2 with control (conventional wound care techniques) |
P <0.05 |
Effect size not calculated | control |