Wu Lihua, Norman Gill, Dumville Jo C, O'Meara Susan, Bell-Syer Sally E M
School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, University of Manchester, Jean McFarlane Buildung (Room 5.311), Oxford Road, Manchester, UK, M13 9PL.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jul 14;2015(7):CD010471. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010471.pub2.
Foot ulcers in people with diabetes mellitus are a common and serious global health issue. Dressings form a key part of ulcer treatment, with clinicians and patients having many different types to choose from. A clear and current overview of current evidence is required to facilitate decision-making regarding dressing use.
To summarize data from systematic reviews of randomised controlled trial evidence on the effectiveness of dressings for healing foot ulcers in people with diabetes mellitus (DM).
We searched the following databases for relevant systematic reviews and associated analyses: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 2); Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE; The Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 1); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, 14 April 2015); Ovid EMBASE (1980 to 14 April 2015). We also handsearched the Cochrane Wounds Group list of reviews. Two review authors independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction. Complete wound healing was the primary outcome assessed; secondary outcomes included health-related quality of life, adverse events, resource use and dressing performance.
We found 13 eligible systematic reviews relevant to this overview that contained a total of 17 relevant RCTs. One review reported the results of a network meta-analysis and so presented information on indirect, as well as direct, treatment effects. Collectively the reviews reported findings for 11 different comparisons supported by direct data and 26 comparisons supported by indirect data only. Only four comparisons informed by direct data found evidence of a difference in wound healing between dressing types, but the evidence was assessed as being of low or very low quality (in one case data could not be located and checked). There was also no robust evidence of a difference between dressing types for any secondary outcomes assessed.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently no robust evidence for differences between wound dressings for any outcome in foot ulcers in people with diabetes (treated in any setting). Practitioners may want to consider the unit cost of dressings, their management properties and patient preference when choosing dressings.
糖尿病患者足部溃疡是一个常见且严重的全球健康问题。敷料是溃疡治疗的关键部分,临床医生和患者有多种不同类型可供选择。需要一份清晰且最新的现有证据综述,以促进关于敷料使用的决策。
总结对糖尿病患者足部溃疡愈合敷料有效性的随机对照试验证据进行系统评价的数据。
我们在以下数据库中检索了相关系统评价及相关分析:Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL;Cochrane图书馆2015年第2期);效果评价文摘数据库(DARE;Cochrane图书馆2015年第1期);Ovid MEDLINE(在研及其他非索引引文,2015年4月14日);Ovid EMBASE(1980年至2015年4月14日)。我们还手工检索了Cochrane伤口小组综述列表。两位综述作者独立进行研究选择、偏倚风险评估和数据提取。完全伤口愈合是评估的主要结局;次要结局包括与健康相关的生活质量、不良事件、资源使用和敷料性能。
我们发现13项与本综述相关的合格系统评价,共包含17项相关随机对照试验。一项综述报告了网络Meta分析的结果,因此呈现了直接和间接治疗效果的信息。这些综述总共报告了11项有直接数据支持的不同比较结果和26项仅有间接数据支持的比较结果。仅有四项有直接数据支持的比较发现了不同敷料类型在伤口愈合方面存在差异的证据,但该证据被评估为低质量或极低质量(有一个案例数据无法找到并核实)。对于所评估的任何次要结局,也没有强有力的证据表明不同敷料类型之间存在差异。
目前没有强有力证据表明糖尿病患者足部溃疡(在任何环境下治疗)使用的伤口敷料在任何结局上存在差异。从业者在选择敷料时可能需要考虑敷料的单位成本、管理特性和患者偏好。