Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 269

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Impact of wound edge protection devices on surgical site infection after laparotomy: multicentre randomised controlled trial (ROSSINI Trial)

Open access
Pinkney, T. D., Calvert, M., Bartlett, D. C., Gheorghe, A., Redman, V., Dowswell, G., Hawkins, W., Mak, T., Youssef, H., Richardson, C., Hornby, S., Magill, L., Haslop, R., Wilson, S., Morton, D., on behalf of the West Midlands Research Collaborative and the ROSSINI Trial Investigators·2013·BMJ

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the clinical effectiveness of wound edge protection devices in reducing surgical site infection after abdominal surgery. DESIGN: Multicentre observer blinded randomised controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: Patients undergoing laparotomy at 21 UK hospitals. INTERVENTIONS: Standard care or the use of a wound edge protection device during surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Surgical site infection within 30 days of surgery, assessed by blinded clinicians at seven and 30 days and by patient's self report for the intervening period. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, duration of stay in hospital, and the effect of characteristics of the patient and operation on the efficacy of the device. RESULTS: 760 patients were enrolled with 382 patients assigned to the device group and 378 to the control group. Six patients in the device group and five in the control group did not undergo laparotomy. Fourteen patients, seven in each group, were lost to follow-up. A total of 184 patients experienced surgical site infection within 30 days of surgery, 91/369 (24.7%) in the device group and 93/366 (25.4%) in the control group (odds ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.69 to 1.36; P=0.85). This lack of benefit was consistent across wound assessments performed by clinicians and those reported by patients and across all secondary outcomes. In the secondary analyses no subgroup could be identified in which there was evidence of clinical benefit associated with use of the device. CONCLUSIONS: Wound edge protection devices do not reduce the rate of surgical site infection in patients undergoing laparotomy, and therefore their routine use for this role cannot be recommended. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 40402832.

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 · 10.1136/bmj.f4305

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.

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 269

Metadata

Authors
Pinkney, T. D., Calvert, M., Bartlett, D. C., Gheorghe, A., Redman, V., Dowswell, G., Hawkins, W., Mak, T., Youssef, H., Richardson, C., Hornby, S., Magill, L., Haslop, R., Wilson, S., Morton, D., & on behalf of the West Midlands Research Collaborative and the ROSSINI Trial Investigators
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2013-07-31
Volume
347
Issue
jul31 2
Pages
f4305-f4305
ISSN
1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2095773368
Cited by
269
References
0
FWCI
20.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Impact of wound edge protection devices on surgical site infection after laparotomy: multicentre randomised controlled trial (ROSSINI Trial). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.f4305
The paper
Pinkney, T. D., Calvert, M., Bartlett, D. C., Gheorghe, A., Redman, V., Dowswell, G., Hawkins, W., Mak, T., Youssef, H., Richardson, C., Hornby, S., Magill, L., Haslop, R., Wilson, S., Morton, D., & on behalf of the West Midlands Research Collaborative and the ROSSINI Trial Investigators. (2013). Impact of wound edge protection devices on surgical site infection after laparotomy: multicentre randomised controlled trial (ROSSINI Trial). BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f4305

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.