Skip to main content
. 2013 Sep 12;2013(9):CD003826. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003826.pub3

Carney 1994.

Methods RCT
Participants Teaching Hospital, UK
 42 patients
 Inclusion criteria: hypertrophic scars
 Exclusion criteria: no other scar‐reducing treatment in previous month
 Sex: not stated
 Age: 2 to 65
Interventions Half assigned to receive Silastic Gel Sheeting and half Cica‐Care (untreated scar on same patient used as control)
Outcomes Length of follow‐up: measurements made at monthly intervals for 6 months, then follow up at 3 and 6 months after ceasing treatment
 Clinical: scar elasticity, appearance, colour
 Complications: mild irritation, pruritis
Notes Extensometric measurements made. Irritation rated by patient on scale of 0 to 5.
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Quote: “Forty‐two patients were randomly assigned to SGS and CC groups and their hypertrophic scars were divided into treated and control areas”.
Comment: no further information was given on how control and treatment areas were selected
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Comment: no information on allocation concealment was given in the study which was judged to be at unclear risk
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 All outcomes High risk Quote: “The study took the form of an open, controlled trial.”
Comment: due to the nature of the treatment, we judged that participants and personnel could not be blinded
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk Quote: “Patients were required to attend a review clinic . . . at each visit the scar was photographed and the appearance of the treated and untreated area was assessed for state and colour . . . the extensibility of each scar was measured”.
Comment: no further information was given on blinding of outcome assessor which we judged to be at unclear risk of bias
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes High risk Quote: “Forty‐two patients were enrolled in the trial, with a total of 47 scars”. The authors go on to state “the results specifically relating the colour and texture of the scars after 2 months (28 patients) and 6 months (21 patients)”.
Comment: no specific mention of loss to follow‐up in made in the study. Due to the quote above we judged the study to be at high risk of attrition bias.Absence of reported data in trial.
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk Comment: the study protocol was not sought, however all measurements discussed in the methods are reported in the results and clinically meaningful outcomes presented.
Other bias Low risk Comment: the study appears to be free of other sources of bias