The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Trial of Wound Irrigation in the Initial Management of Open Fracture Wounds
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: The management of open fractures requires wound irrigation and débridement to remove contaminants, but the effectiveness of various pressures and solutions for irrigation remains controversial. We investigated the effects of castile soap versus normal saline irrigation delivered by means of high, low, or very low irrigation pressure. METHODS: In this study with a 2-by-3 factorial design, conducted at 41 clinical centers, we randomly assigned patients who had an open fracture of an extremity to undergo irrigation with one of three irrigation pressures (high pressure [>20 psi], low pressure [5 to 10 psi], or very low pressure [1 to 2 psi]) and one of two irrigation solutions (castile soap or normal saline). The primary end point was reoperation within 12 months after the index surgery for promotion of wound or bone healing or treatment of a wound infection. RESULTS: A total of 2551 patients underwent randomization, of whom 2447 were deemed eligible and included in the final analyses. Reoperation occurred in 109 of 826 patients (13.2%) in the high-pressure group, 103 of 809 (12.7%) in the low-pressure group, and 111 of 812 (13.7%) in the very-low-pressure group. Hazard ratios for the three pairwise comparisons were as follows: for low versus high pressure, 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70 to 1.20; P=0.53), for high versus very low pressure, 1.02 (95% CI, 0.78 to 1.33; P=0.89), and for low versus very low pressure, 0.93 (95% CI, 0.71 to 1.23; P=0.62). Reoperation occurred in 182 of 1229 patients (14.8%) in the soap group and in 141 of 1218 (11.6%) in the saline group (hazard ratio, 1.32, 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.66; P=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The rates of reoperation were similar regardless of irrigation pressure, a finding that indicates that very low pressure is an acceptable, low-cost alternative for the irrigation of open fractures. The reoperation rate was higher in the soap group than in the saline group. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; FLOW ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00788398.).
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cites
Clinical Trials: A Practical Approach.
Hill, I. D., & Pocock, S. J. (1984) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2531186 · Cited by 2,930
Is a subgroup effect believable? Updating criteria to evaluate the credibility of subgroup analyses
Sun, X., Briel, M., Walter, S. D., & Guyatt, G. H. (2010) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.c117 · Cited by 808
Post-randomisation exclusions: the intention to treat principle and excluding patients from analysis
Fergusson, D., Aaron, S. D., Guyatt, G., & Hébert, P. (2002) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.325.7365.652 · Cited by 708
Bhandari, M., Guyatt, G., Walter, S. D., Tornetta, P., Schemitsch, E. H., Swiontkowski, M., & Sanders, D. (2008) · The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume · doi:10.2106/jbjs.g.01694 · Cited by 450
Akl, E. A., Briel, M., You, J. J., Sun, X., Johnston, B. C., Busse, J. W., Mulla, S., Lamontagne, F., Bassler, D., Vera, C., et al. (2012) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.e2809 · Cited by 350
Bhandari, M., Schemitsch, E. H., Adili, A. F., Lachowski, R. J., & Shaughnessy, S. G. (1999) · Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma · doi:10.1097/00005131-199911000-00002 · Cited by 152
Evidence-Based Nursing Care Guidelines: Medical-Surgical Interventions
Ackley, B. J., & Ladwig, G. B. (2007) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 150
Blinded interpretation of study results can feasibly and effectively diminish interpretation bias
Järvinen, T. L. N., Sihvonen, R., Bhandari, M., Sprague, S., Malmivaara, A. O. V., Paavola, M. P., Schünemann, H. J., & Guyatt, G. H. (2014) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.11.011 · Cited by 149
RICHARD, L. (1983) · PubMed · Cited by 129
Foote, C. J., Guyatt, G. H., Vignesh, N. K., Mundi, R., Chaudhry, H., Heels‐Ansdell, D., Thabane, L., Tornetta, P., & Bhandari, M. (2015) · Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research · doi:10.1007/s11999-015-4224-y · Cited by 101
Cited by
Living Microecological Hydrogels for Wound Healing
Chen, G., Wang, F., Zhang, X., Shang, Y., & Zhao, Y. (2023) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.adg3478 · Cited by 196
O’Hara, N. N., Heels-Ansdell, D., Bzovsky, S., Dodds, S., Thabane, L., Bhandari, M., Guyatt, G., Devereaux, P. J., Slobogean, G. P., Sprague, S., et al. (2022) · Trials · doi:10.1186/s13063-022-06541-0 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- The FLOW Investigators
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 2015-12-31
- Volume
- 373
- Issue
- 27
- Pages
- 2629-2641
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W2231419948
- Cited by
- 365
- References
- 14
- FWCI
- 18.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: A Trial of Wound Irrigation in the Initial Management of Open Fracture Wounds. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa1508502
- The paper
- The FLOW Investigators. (2015). A Trial of Wound Irrigation in the Initial Management of Open Fracture Wounds. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1508502
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.