Comparison 3. Continuous versus interrupted closure.

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Incisional hernia	11	3854	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.01 [0.76, 1.35]
1.1 Same closure method and suture material in each group	4	1195	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.21 [0.89, 1.63]
1.2 Different closure method or suture material in each group	7	2659	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.94 [0.59, 1.48]
2 Wound infection	23	10039	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.13 [0.96, 1.34]
2.1 Same closure method and suture material in each group	6	4933	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.20 [0.99, 1.45]
2.2 Different closure method or suture material in each group	17	5106	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.07 [0.83, 1.38]
3 Wound dehiscence	21	9228	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.21 [0.90, 1.64]
3.1 Same closure method and suture material in each group	6	4928	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.15 [0.70, 1.88]
3.2 Different closure method or suture material in each group	15	4300	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.27 [0.84, 1.92]
4 Sinus or fistula formation	10	5082	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.51 [0.64, 3.61]
4.1 Same closure method and suture material in each group	4	4027	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	0.76 [0.51, 1.12]
4.2 Different closure method or suture material in each group	6	1055	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	3.71 [1.32, 10.45]
5 Hernia and type of incision	4	1195	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.21 [0.89, 1.63]
5.1 Midline incision only (same suture material)	2	727	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.19 [0.86, 1.64]
5.2 Other incisions, combination of incisions (same suture material)	2	468	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.35 [0.58, 3.14]