Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 1 Summary characteristics of included systematic reviews

From: Seeking effective interventions to treat complex wounds: an overview of systematic reviews

Characteristic Number of systematic reviews (n = 99) Percentage of systematic reviews
Year   
 1997–1999 6 6.1
 2000–2002 9 9.1
 2003–2005 15 15.2
 2006–2008 21 21.2
 2009–2011 36 36.4
 2012 12 12.1
Country of conduct   
Europe (38 of these are from the United Kingdom) 65 65.7
 North America 19 19.2
 Australasia (Australia, New Zealand) 7 7.1
 Asia (Malaysia, China, Taiwan, India) 6 6.1
South America 2 2.0
Number of studies included   
 0–1 3 3.0
 2–10 53 53.5
 11–20 16 16.2
 21–30 10 10.1
 31–40 6 6.1
 41–100 8 8.1
 >100 3 3.0
Study designs included *   
 Randomized clinical trials 93 70.5
 Observational studies
 Non-randomized clinical trials 20 15.2
 Controlled before-after studies, interrupted 17 12.9
 Time series 2 1.5
Patient population   
 Not specifically reported 65 65.7
 Diabetes 21 21.2
 Chronic venous disease 4 4.0
 Complex lower limb wounds 4 4.0
 Inpatients/institutionalized 3 3.0
 Ambulatory patients 1 1.0
 Elderly 1 1.0
Type of wound *   
 Venous leg ulcers 36 31.3
 Diabetic foot/leg ulcers 26 22.6
 Pressure ulcers 20 17.4
 Mixed arterial/venous leg ulcers 16 13.9
 Mixed complex wound unspecified 10 8.7
 Infected surgical wounds 7 7.0
Interventions examined *   
 Adjuvant 33 20.3
 Dressings 26 16.0
 Biologics 16 9.8
 Other topical 14 8.6
 Other oral 11 6.8
 Stockings 10 6.1
 Support surfaces 10 6.1
 Wound cleansing 10 6.1
 Skin replacement 9 5.5
 Bandages 7 4.3
 Surgery 7 4.3
 Nutritional supplementation 4 2.5
 Wound care program 4 2.5
 Complementary and alternative medicine 2 1.2
Comparators examined *   
 Usual care 63 45.7
 Dressings 34 24.6
 Bandages 8 5.8
 Not reported 8 5.8
 Support surfaces 7 5.1
 Other topical 5 3.6
 Wound cleansing 5 3.6
 Stockings 4 2.9
 Other oral 2 1.5
 All other treatments 1 0.7
 Skin replacement 1 0.7
Number of treatment comparisons per outcome   
Systematic reviews with a meta-analysis n = 143 comparisons %
 Wound area/size reduction 10 7.0
 Time to healing or rate of healing 10 7.0
 Ulcer healing 20 14.0
 Proportion of patients with healed wounds 97 67.8
 No healing improvement 5 3.5
 Length of hospitalization 1 0.7
Systematic reviews without a meta-analysis n = 184 comparisons %
 Wound area/size reduction 18 9.8
 Time to healing or rate of healing 53 28.8
 Ulcer healing 92 50.0
 Proportion of patients with healed wounds 21 11.4
  1. *Numbers do not add up to 99, as the systematic reviews contributed data to more than one category.