The Experts below are selected from a list of 24954 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Juul Achten - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
cost effectiveness of negative pressure Wound therapy in adults with severe open fractures of the lower limb evidence from the wollf randomized controlled trial
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-british Volume, 2019Co-Authors: Julie Bruce, Stavros Petrou, Juul Achten, Sarah E Lamb, James P M Masters, Ben Parker, Nicholas R ParsonsAbstract:Aims The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of negative-pressure Wound therapy (NPWT) in comparison with standard Wound Management after initial surgical Wound debridement in ...
-
effect of negative pressure Wound therapy vs standard Wound Management on 12 month disability among adults with severe open fracture of the lower limb the wollf randomized clinical trial
JAMA, 2018Co-Authors: Julie Bruce, Elizabeth Tutton, Stavros Petrou, Juul Achten, Sarah E Lamb, Matthew L. CostaAbstract:Importance Open fractures of the lower limb occur when a broken bone penetrates the skin. There can be major complications from these fractures, which can be life-changing. Objectives To assess the disability, rate of deep infection, and quality of life in patients with severe open fracture of the lower limb treated with negative pressure Wound therapy (NPWT) vs standard Wound Management after the first surgical debridement of the Wound. Design, Setting, and Participants Multicenter randomized trial performed in the UK Major Trauma Network, recruiting 460 patients aged 16 years or older with a severe open fracture of the lower limb from July 2012 through December 2015. Final outcome data were collected through November 2016. Exclusions were presentation more than 72 hours after injury and inability to complete questionnaires. Interventions NPWT (n = 226) in which an open-cell solid foam or gauze was placed over the surface of the Wound and connected to a suction pump, creating a partial vacuum over the dressing, vs standard dressings not involving application of negative pressure (n = 234). Main Outcomes and Measures Disability Rating Index score (range, 0 [no disability] to 100 [completely disabled]) at 12 months was the primary outcome measure, with a minimal clinically important difference of 8 points. Secondary outcomes were complications including deep infection and quality of life (score ranged from 1 [best possible] to −0.59 [worst possible]; minimal clinically important difference, 0.08) collected at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Results Among 460 patients who were randomized (mean age, 45.3 years; 74% men), 88% (374/427) of available study participants completed the trial. There were no statistically significant differences in the patients’ Disability Rating Index score at 12 months (mean score, 45.5 in the NPWT group vs 42.4 in the standard dressing group; mean difference, −3.9 [95% CI, −8.9 to 1.2];P = .13), in the number of deep surgical site infections (16 [7.1%] in the NPWT group vs 19 [8.1%] in the standard dressing group; difference, 1.0% [95% CI, −4.2% to 6.3%];P = .64), or in quality of life between groups (difference in EuroQol 5-dimensions questionnaire, 0.02 [95% CI, −0.05 to 0.08]; Short Form–12 Physical Component Score, 0.5 [95% CI, −3.1 to 4.1] and Mental Health Component Score, −0.4 [95% CI, −2.2 to 1.4]). Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with severe open fracture of the lower limb, use of NPWT compared with standard Wound dressing did not improve self-rated disability at 12 months. The findings do not support this treatment for severe open fractures. Trial Registration isrctn.org Identifier:ISRCTN33756652
-
standard Wound Management versus negative pressure Wound therapy in the treatment of adult patients having surgical incisions for major trauma to the lower limb a two arm parallel group superiority randomised controlled trial protocol for Wound heali
BMJ Open, 2018Co-Authors: Juul Achten, Julie Bruce, Susan J Dutton, Karan Vadher, Jagdeep Nanchahal, Louise Spoors, James P M Masters, Jason Madan, Matthew L. CostaAbstract:Introduction Patients with closed high-energy injuries associated with major trauma have surprisingly high rates of surgical site infection in incisions created during fracture fixation. One factor that may reduce the risk of surgical site infection is the type of dressing applied over the closed surgical incision. In this multicentre randomised clinical trial, negative-pressure Wound therapy will be compared with standard dressings with outcomes of deep infection, quality of life, pain and disability. Methods and analysis Adult patients presenting to hospital within 72 hours of sustaining major trauma, requiring a surgical incision to treat a fractured lower limb, are eligible for inclusion. Randomisation, stratified by trial centre, open/closed fracture at presentation and Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≤15 versus ISS ≥16 will be administered via a secure web-based service using minimisation. The random allocation will be to either standard Wound Management or negative-pressure Wound therapy. Trial participants will usually have clinical follow-up at the local fracture clinic for a minimum of 6 months, as per standard National Health Service practice. Diagnosis of deep infection will be recorded at 30 days. Functional, pain and quality of life outcome data will be collected using the Disability Rating Index, Douleur Neuropathique Questionnaire and Euroqol - 5 Dimension - 5 level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaires at 3 months and 6 months postinjury. Further data will be captured on resource use and any late postoperative complications. Longer term outcomes will be assessed annually for 5 years and reported separately. Ethics and dissemination National Research Ethics Committee approved this study on 16 February 2016 16/WM/0006. The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment monograph and a manuscript to a peer-reviewed journal will be submitted on completion of this trial. The results of this trial will inform clinical practice on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the treatment of this injury. Trial registration number ISRCTN12702354; Pre-results.
Sarah E Lamb - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
cost effectiveness of negative pressure Wound therapy in adults with severe open fractures of the lower limb evidence from the wollf randomized controlled trial
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-british Volume, 2019Co-Authors: Julie Bruce, Stavros Petrou, Juul Achten, Sarah E Lamb, James P M Masters, Ben Parker, Nicholas R ParsonsAbstract:Aims The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of negative-pressure Wound therapy (NPWT) in comparison with standard Wound Management after initial surgical Wound debridement in ...
-
effect of negative pressure Wound therapy vs standard Wound Management on 12 month disability among adults with severe open fracture of the lower limb the wollf randomized clinical trial
JAMA, 2018Co-Authors: Julie Bruce, Elizabeth Tutton, Stavros Petrou, Juul Achten, Sarah E Lamb, Matthew L. CostaAbstract:Importance Open fractures of the lower limb occur when a broken bone penetrates the skin. There can be major complications from these fractures, which can be life-changing. Objectives To assess the disability, rate of deep infection, and quality of life in patients with severe open fracture of the lower limb treated with negative pressure Wound therapy (NPWT) vs standard Wound Management after the first surgical debridement of the Wound. Design, Setting, and Participants Multicenter randomized trial performed in the UK Major Trauma Network, recruiting 460 patients aged 16 years or older with a severe open fracture of the lower limb from July 2012 through December 2015. Final outcome data were collected through November 2016. Exclusions were presentation more than 72 hours after injury and inability to complete questionnaires. Interventions NPWT (n = 226) in which an open-cell solid foam or gauze was placed over the surface of the Wound and connected to a suction pump, creating a partial vacuum over the dressing, vs standard dressings not involving application of negative pressure (n = 234). Main Outcomes and Measures Disability Rating Index score (range, 0 [no disability] to 100 [completely disabled]) at 12 months was the primary outcome measure, with a minimal clinically important difference of 8 points. Secondary outcomes were complications including deep infection and quality of life (score ranged from 1 [best possible] to −0.59 [worst possible]; minimal clinically important difference, 0.08) collected at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Results Among 460 patients who were randomized (mean age, 45.3 years; 74% men), 88% (374/427) of available study participants completed the trial. There were no statistically significant differences in the patients’ Disability Rating Index score at 12 months (mean score, 45.5 in the NPWT group vs 42.4 in the standard dressing group; mean difference, −3.9 [95% CI, −8.9 to 1.2];P = .13), in the number of deep surgical site infections (16 [7.1%] in the NPWT group vs 19 [8.1%] in the standard dressing group; difference, 1.0% [95% CI, −4.2% to 6.3%];P = .64), or in quality of life between groups (difference in EuroQol 5-dimensions questionnaire, 0.02 [95% CI, −0.05 to 0.08]; Short Form–12 Physical Component Score, 0.5 [95% CI, −3.1 to 4.1] and Mental Health Component Score, −0.4 [95% CI, −2.2 to 1.4]). Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with severe open fracture of the lower limb, use of NPWT compared with standard Wound dressing did not improve self-rated disability at 12 months. The findings do not support this treatment for severe open fractures. Trial Registration isrctn.org Identifier:ISRCTN33756652
Stavros Petrou - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
cost effectiveness of negative pressure Wound therapy in adults with severe open fractures of the lower limb evidence from the wollf randomized controlled trial
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-british Volume, 2019Co-Authors: Julie Bruce, Stavros Petrou, Juul Achten, Sarah E Lamb, James P M Masters, Ben Parker, Nicholas R ParsonsAbstract:Aims The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of negative-pressure Wound therapy (NPWT) in comparison with standard Wound Management after initial surgical Wound debridement in ...
-
effect of negative pressure Wound therapy vs standard Wound Management on 12 month disability among adults with severe open fracture of the lower limb the wollf randomized clinical trial
JAMA, 2018Co-Authors: Julie Bruce, Elizabeth Tutton, Stavros Petrou, Juul Achten, Sarah E Lamb, Matthew L. CostaAbstract:Importance Open fractures of the lower limb occur when a broken bone penetrates the skin. There can be major complications from these fractures, which can be life-changing. Objectives To assess the disability, rate of deep infection, and quality of life in patients with severe open fracture of the lower limb treated with negative pressure Wound therapy (NPWT) vs standard Wound Management after the first surgical debridement of the Wound. Design, Setting, and Participants Multicenter randomized trial performed in the UK Major Trauma Network, recruiting 460 patients aged 16 years or older with a severe open fracture of the lower limb from July 2012 through December 2015. Final outcome data were collected through November 2016. Exclusions were presentation more than 72 hours after injury and inability to complete questionnaires. Interventions NPWT (n = 226) in which an open-cell solid foam or gauze was placed over the surface of the Wound and connected to a suction pump, creating a partial vacuum over the dressing, vs standard dressings not involving application of negative pressure (n = 234). Main Outcomes and Measures Disability Rating Index score (range, 0 [no disability] to 100 [completely disabled]) at 12 months was the primary outcome measure, with a minimal clinically important difference of 8 points. Secondary outcomes were complications including deep infection and quality of life (score ranged from 1 [best possible] to −0.59 [worst possible]; minimal clinically important difference, 0.08) collected at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Results Among 460 patients who were randomized (mean age, 45.3 years; 74% men), 88% (374/427) of available study participants completed the trial. There were no statistically significant differences in the patients’ Disability Rating Index score at 12 months (mean score, 45.5 in the NPWT group vs 42.4 in the standard dressing group; mean difference, −3.9 [95% CI, −8.9 to 1.2];P = .13), in the number of deep surgical site infections (16 [7.1%] in the NPWT group vs 19 [8.1%] in the standard dressing group; difference, 1.0% [95% CI, −4.2% to 6.3%];P = .64), or in quality of life between groups (difference in EuroQol 5-dimensions questionnaire, 0.02 [95% CI, −0.05 to 0.08]; Short Form–12 Physical Component Score, 0.5 [95% CI, −3.1 to 4.1] and Mental Health Component Score, −0.4 [95% CI, −2.2 to 1.4]). Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with severe open fracture of the lower limb, use of NPWT compared with standard Wound dressing did not improve self-rated disability at 12 months. The findings do not support this treatment for severe open fractures. Trial Registration isrctn.org Identifier:ISRCTN33756652
Matthew L. Costa - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
effect of negative pressure Wound therapy vs standard Wound Management on 12 month disability among adults with severe open fracture of the lower limb the wollf randomized clinical trial
JAMA, 2018Co-Authors: Julie Bruce, Elizabeth Tutton, Stavros Petrou, Juul Achten, Sarah E Lamb, Matthew L. CostaAbstract:Importance Open fractures of the lower limb occur when a broken bone penetrates the skin. There can be major complications from these fractures, which can be life-changing. Objectives To assess the disability, rate of deep infection, and quality of life in patients with severe open fracture of the lower limb treated with negative pressure Wound therapy (NPWT) vs standard Wound Management after the first surgical debridement of the Wound. Design, Setting, and Participants Multicenter randomized trial performed in the UK Major Trauma Network, recruiting 460 patients aged 16 years or older with a severe open fracture of the lower limb from July 2012 through December 2015. Final outcome data were collected through November 2016. Exclusions were presentation more than 72 hours after injury and inability to complete questionnaires. Interventions NPWT (n = 226) in which an open-cell solid foam or gauze was placed over the surface of the Wound and connected to a suction pump, creating a partial vacuum over the dressing, vs standard dressings not involving application of negative pressure (n = 234). Main Outcomes and Measures Disability Rating Index score (range, 0 [no disability] to 100 [completely disabled]) at 12 months was the primary outcome measure, with a minimal clinically important difference of 8 points. Secondary outcomes were complications including deep infection and quality of life (score ranged from 1 [best possible] to −0.59 [worst possible]; minimal clinically important difference, 0.08) collected at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Results Among 460 patients who were randomized (mean age, 45.3 years; 74% men), 88% (374/427) of available study participants completed the trial. There were no statistically significant differences in the patients’ Disability Rating Index score at 12 months (mean score, 45.5 in the NPWT group vs 42.4 in the standard dressing group; mean difference, −3.9 [95% CI, −8.9 to 1.2];P = .13), in the number of deep surgical site infections (16 [7.1%] in the NPWT group vs 19 [8.1%] in the standard dressing group; difference, 1.0% [95% CI, −4.2% to 6.3%];P = .64), or in quality of life between groups (difference in EuroQol 5-dimensions questionnaire, 0.02 [95% CI, −0.05 to 0.08]; Short Form–12 Physical Component Score, 0.5 [95% CI, −3.1 to 4.1] and Mental Health Component Score, −0.4 [95% CI, −2.2 to 1.4]). Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with severe open fracture of the lower limb, use of NPWT compared with standard Wound dressing did not improve self-rated disability at 12 months. The findings do not support this treatment for severe open fractures. Trial Registration isrctn.org Identifier:ISRCTN33756652
-
standard Wound Management versus negative pressure Wound therapy in the treatment of adult patients having surgical incisions for major trauma to the lower limb a two arm parallel group superiority randomised controlled trial protocol for Wound heali
BMJ Open, 2018Co-Authors: Juul Achten, Julie Bruce, Susan J Dutton, Karan Vadher, Jagdeep Nanchahal, Louise Spoors, James P M Masters, Jason Madan, Matthew L. CostaAbstract:Introduction Patients with closed high-energy injuries associated with major trauma have surprisingly high rates of surgical site infection in incisions created during fracture fixation. One factor that may reduce the risk of surgical site infection is the type of dressing applied over the closed surgical incision. In this multicentre randomised clinical trial, negative-pressure Wound therapy will be compared with standard dressings with outcomes of deep infection, quality of life, pain and disability. Methods and analysis Adult patients presenting to hospital within 72 hours of sustaining major trauma, requiring a surgical incision to treat a fractured lower limb, are eligible for inclusion. Randomisation, stratified by trial centre, open/closed fracture at presentation and Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≤15 versus ISS ≥16 will be administered via a secure web-based service using minimisation. The random allocation will be to either standard Wound Management or negative-pressure Wound therapy. Trial participants will usually have clinical follow-up at the local fracture clinic for a minimum of 6 months, as per standard National Health Service practice. Diagnosis of deep infection will be recorded at 30 days. Functional, pain and quality of life outcome data will be collected using the Disability Rating Index, Douleur Neuropathique Questionnaire and Euroqol - 5 Dimension - 5 level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaires at 3 months and 6 months postinjury. Further data will be captured on resource use and any late postoperative complications. Longer term outcomes will be assessed annually for 5 years and reported separately. Ethics and dissemination National Research Ethics Committee approved this study on 16 February 2016 16/WM/0006. The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment monograph and a manuscript to a peer-reviewed journal will be submitted on completion of this trial. The results of this trial will inform clinical practice on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the treatment of this injury. Trial registration number ISRCTN12702354; Pre-results.
Julie Bruce - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
cost effectiveness of negative pressure Wound therapy in adults with severe open fractures of the lower limb evidence from the wollf randomized controlled trial
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-british Volume, 2019Co-Authors: Julie Bruce, Stavros Petrou, Juul Achten, Sarah E Lamb, James P M Masters, Ben Parker, Nicholas R ParsonsAbstract:Aims The aim of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of negative-pressure Wound therapy (NPWT) in comparison with standard Wound Management after initial surgical Wound debridement in ...
-
effect of negative pressure Wound therapy vs standard Wound Management on 12 month disability among adults with severe open fracture of the lower limb the wollf randomized clinical trial
JAMA, 2018Co-Authors: Julie Bruce, Elizabeth Tutton, Stavros Petrou, Juul Achten, Sarah E Lamb, Matthew L. CostaAbstract:Importance Open fractures of the lower limb occur when a broken bone penetrates the skin. There can be major complications from these fractures, which can be life-changing. Objectives To assess the disability, rate of deep infection, and quality of life in patients with severe open fracture of the lower limb treated with negative pressure Wound therapy (NPWT) vs standard Wound Management after the first surgical debridement of the Wound. Design, Setting, and Participants Multicenter randomized trial performed in the UK Major Trauma Network, recruiting 460 patients aged 16 years or older with a severe open fracture of the lower limb from July 2012 through December 2015. Final outcome data were collected through November 2016. Exclusions were presentation more than 72 hours after injury and inability to complete questionnaires. Interventions NPWT (n = 226) in which an open-cell solid foam or gauze was placed over the surface of the Wound and connected to a suction pump, creating a partial vacuum over the dressing, vs standard dressings not involving application of negative pressure (n = 234). Main Outcomes and Measures Disability Rating Index score (range, 0 [no disability] to 100 [completely disabled]) at 12 months was the primary outcome measure, with a minimal clinically important difference of 8 points. Secondary outcomes were complications including deep infection and quality of life (score ranged from 1 [best possible] to −0.59 [worst possible]; minimal clinically important difference, 0.08) collected at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Results Among 460 patients who were randomized (mean age, 45.3 years; 74% men), 88% (374/427) of available study participants completed the trial. There were no statistically significant differences in the patients’ Disability Rating Index score at 12 months (mean score, 45.5 in the NPWT group vs 42.4 in the standard dressing group; mean difference, −3.9 [95% CI, −8.9 to 1.2];P = .13), in the number of deep surgical site infections (16 [7.1%] in the NPWT group vs 19 [8.1%] in the standard dressing group; difference, 1.0% [95% CI, −4.2% to 6.3%];P = .64), or in quality of life between groups (difference in EuroQol 5-dimensions questionnaire, 0.02 [95% CI, −0.05 to 0.08]; Short Form–12 Physical Component Score, 0.5 [95% CI, −3.1 to 4.1] and Mental Health Component Score, −0.4 [95% CI, −2.2 to 1.4]). Conclusions and Relevance Among patients with severe open fracture of the lower limb, use of NPWT compared with standard Wound dressing did not improve self-rated disability at 12 months. The findings do not support this treatment for severe open fractures. Trial Registration isrctn.org Identifier:ISRCTN33756652
-
standard Wound Management versus negative pressure Wound therapy in the treatment of adult patients having surgical incisions for major trauma to the lower limb a two arm parallel group superiority randomised controlled trial protocol for Wound heali
BMJ Open, 2018Co-Authors: Juul Achten, Julie Bruce, Susan J Dutton, Karan Vadher, Jagdeep Nanchahal, Louise Spoors, James P M Masters, Jason Madan, Matthew L. CostaAbstract:Introduction Patients with closed high-energy injuries associated with major trauma have surprisingly high rates of surgical site infection in incisions created during fracture fixation. One factor that may reduce the risk of surgical site infection is the type of dressing applied over the closed surgical incision. In this multicentre randomised clinical trial, negative-pressure Wound therapy will be compared with standard dressings with outcomes of deep infection, quality of life, pain and disability. Methods and analysis Adult patients presenting to hospital within 72 hours of sustaining major trauma, requiring a surgical incision to treat a fractured lower limb, are eligible for inclusion. Randomisation, stratified by trial centre, open/closed fracture at presentation and Injury Severity Score (ISS) ≤15 versus ISS ≥16 will be administered via a secure web-based service using minimisation. The random allocation will be to either standard Wound Management or negative-pressure Wound therapy. Trial participants will usually have clinical follow-up at the local fracture clinic for a minimum of 6 months, as per standard National Health Service practice. Diagnosis of deep infection will be recorded at 30 days. Functional, pain and quality of life outcome data will be collected using the Disability Rating Index, Douleur Neuropathique Questionnaire and Euroqol - 5 Dimension - 5 level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaires at 3 months and 6 months postinjury. Further data will be captured on resource use and any late postoperative complications. Longer term outcomes will be assessed annually for 5 years and reported separately. Ethics and dissemination National Research Ethics Committee approved this study on 16 February 2016 16/WM/0006. The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment monograph and a manuscript to a peer-reviewed journal will be submitted on completion of this trial. The results of this trial will inform clinical practice on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the treatment of this injury. Trial registration number ISRCTN12702354; Pre-results.
