Evidence-based recommendations for the use of Negative Pressure Wound Therapy in traumatic wounds and reconstructive surgery: Steps towards an international consensus
(2011) In Injury 42(Suppl. 1). p.1-12- Abstract
- Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has become widely adopted over the last 15 years and over 1000 peer reviewed publications are available describing its use. Despite this, there remains uncertainty regarding several aspects of usage. In order to respond to this gap a global expert panel was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations describing the use of NPWT. In this paper the results of the study of evidence in traumatic wounds (including soft tissue defects, open fractures and burns) and reconstructive procedures (including flaps and grafts) are reported. Evidence-based recommendations were obtained by a systematic review of the literature, grading of evidence, drafting of the recommendations by a global expert panel,... (More)
- Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has become widely adopted over the last 15 years and over 1000 peer reviewed publications are available describing its use. Despite this, there remains uncertainty regarding several aspects of usage. In order to respond to this gap a global expert panel was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations describing the use of NPWT. In this paper the results of the study of evidence in traumatic wounds (including soft tissue defects, open fractures and burns) and reconstructive procedures (including flaps and grafts) are reported. Evidence-based recommendations were obtained by a systematic review of the literature, grading of evidence, drafting of the recommendations by a global expert panel, followed by a formal consultative consensus development program in which 422 independent healthcare professionals were able to agree or disagree with the recommendations. The criteria for agreement were set at 80% approval. Evidence and recommendations were graded according to the SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network) classification system. Twelve recommendations were developed in total; 4 for soft tissue trauma and open fracture injuries, 1 for burn injuries, 3 for flaps and 4 for skin grafts. The present evidence base is strongest for the use of NPWT on skin grafts and weakest as a primary treatment for burns. In the consultative process, 11/12 of the proposed recommendations reached the 80% agreement threshold. The development of evidence-based recommendations for NPWT with direct validation from a large group of practicing clinicians offers a broader basis for consensus than work by an expert panel alone. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/1878024
- author
- organization
- publishing date
- 2011
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT), Consensus, Recommendations, Systematic review, Traumatic wounds, Reconstructive closure
- in
- Injury
- volume
- 42
- issue
- Suppl. 1
- pages
- 1 - 12
- publisher
- Elsevier
- external identifiers
-
- wos:000287308900001
- scopus:79951664907
- ISSN
- 1879-0267
- DOI
- 10.1016/S0020-1383(11)00041-6
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- f28585e1-445a-4fe0-9d4a-1bafb6c12ae5 (old id 1878024)
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-01 15:03:48
- date last changed
- 2022-02-27 05:58:13
@article{f28585e1-445a-4fe0-9d4a-1bafb6c12ae5,
abstract = {{Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has become widely adopted over the last 15 years and over 1000 peer reviewed publications are available describing its use. Despite this, there remains uncertainty regarding several aspects of usage. In order to respond to this gap a global expert panel was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations describing the use of NPWT. In this paper the results of the study of evidence in traumatic wounds (including soft tissue defects, open fractures and burns) and reconstructive procedures (including flaps and grafts) are reported. Evidence-based recommendations were obtained by a systematic review of the literature, grading of evidence, drafting of the recommendations by a global expert panel, followed by a formal consultative consensus development program in which 422 independent healthcare professionals were able to agree or disagree with the recommendations. The criteria for agreement were set at 80% approval. Evidence and recommendations were graded according to the SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network) classification system. Twelve recommendations were developed in total; 4 for soft tissue trauma and open fracture injuries, 1 for burn injuries, 3 for flaps and 4 for skin grafts. The present evidence base is strongest for the use of NPWT on skin grafts and weakest as a primary treatment for burns. In the consultative process, 11/12 of the proposed recommendations reached the 80% agreement threshold. The development of evidence-based recommendations for NPWT with direct validation from a large group of practicing clinicians offers a broader basis for consensus than work by an expert panel alone. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.}},
author = {{Runkel, N. and Krug, E. and Berg, L. and Lee, C. and Hudson, D. and Birke-Sorensen, H. and Depoorter, M. and Dunn, R. and Jeffery, S. and Duteille, F. and Bruhin, A. and Caravaggi, C. and Chariker, M. and Dowsett, C. and Ferreira, F. and Francos Martinez, J. M. and Grudzien, G. and Ichioka, S. and Ingemansson, Richard and Malmsjö, Malin and Rome, P. and Vig, S. and Martin, R. and Smith, J.}},
issn = {{1879-0267}},
keywords = {{Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT); Consensus; Recommendations; Systematic review; Traumatic wounds; Reconstructive closure}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{Suppl. 1}},
pages = {{1--12}},
publisher = {{Elsevier}},
series = {{Injury}},
title = {{Evidence-based recommendations for the use of Negative Pressure Wound Therapy in traumatic wounds and reconstructive surgery: Steps towards an international consensus}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0020-1383(11)00041-6}},
doi = {{10.1016/S0020-1383(11)00041-6}},
volume = {{42}},
year = {{2011}},
}