Skip to main content

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.