Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 232

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Topical negative pressure for treating chronic wounds

Ubbink, Dirk T, Westerbos, Stijn Joël, Evans, Debra, Land, Lucy, Vermeulen, Hester·2008·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Chronic wounds mainly affect the elderly and those with multiple health problems. Despite the use of modern dressings, some of these wounds take a long time to heal, fail to heal, or recur, causing significant pain and discomfort to the person and cost to health services. Topical negative pressure (TNP) is used to promote healing of surgical wounds by using suction to drain excess fluid from wounds. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of TNP on chronic wound healing. SEARCH STRATEGY: For this second update of this review we searched the Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (December 2007), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) - The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2007, Ovid MEDLINE - 1950 to November Week 2 2007, Ovid EMBASE - 1982 to 2007 Week 50 and Ovid CINAHL - 1980 to December Week 1 2007. In addition, we contacted authors, companies, manufacturers, and distributors to identify relevant trials and information. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials which evaluated the effects of TNP on people with chronic wounds. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Selection of the trials, quality assessment, data abstraction, and data synthesis were done by two authors independently. Disagreements were solved by discussion. MAIN RESULTS: Two trials were included in the original review. A further five trials were included in this second update resulting in a total of seven trials involving 205 participants. The seven trials compared TNP with five different comparator treatments. Four trials compared TNP with gauze soaked in either 0.9% saline or Ringer's solution. The other three trials compared TNP with hydrocolloid gel plus gauze, a treatment package comprising papain-urea topical treatment, and cadexomer iodine or hydrocolloid, hydrogels, alginate and foam. These data do not show that TNP significantly increases the healing rate of chronic wounds compared with comparators. Data on secondary outcomes such as infection rate, quality of life, oedema, hospitalisation and bacterial load were not reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Trials comparing TNP with alternative treatments for chronic wounds have methodological flaws and data do demonstrate a beneficial effect of TNP on wound healing however more, better quality research is needed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd001898.pub2This paper is marked retracted.

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 232

Metadata

Authors
Ubbink, D. T., Westerbos, S. J., Evans, D., Land, L., & Vermeulen, H.
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Published
2008-07-16
Issue
3
Pages
CD001898-CD001898
ISSN
1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1892657396
Cited by
232
References
1
Type
reference entry
Language
en
Status
Retracted
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Topical negative pressure for treating chronic wounds. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/14651858.cd001898.pub2
The paper
Ubbink, D. T., Westerbos, S. J., Evans, D., Land, L., & Vermeulen, H. (2008). Topical negative pressure for treating chronic wounds. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd001898.pub2

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.