• 1. The First Clinical Medical College of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China;
  • 2. Department of Intensive Care Unit, The First Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China;
  • 3. School of Nursing, Gansu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou 730000, China;
  • 4. Department of Nursing, Gansu Provincial Hostipal, Lanzhou 730000, China;
  • 5. Department of Nursing, Rehabilitation Hospital of Gansu Province, Lanzhou 730000, China;
  • 6. Department of Nursing, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou 730000, China;
  • 7. Evidence-based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China;
ZHANGZhi-gang, Email: zzg3444@163.com
Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Objective To systematically evaluate the effects of nine different dressings in the treatment of diabetic foot (DF). Methods Databases including PubMed, The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2016), Web of Science, EMbase, CBM, CNKI and WanFang Data were searched to collect randomized control trials (RCTs) about the effects of dressings for the DF from inception to April 2016. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then network meta-analysis was performed using WinBugs 1.4.3 and Stata 13.0 softwares. Results A total of 29 RCTs involving 2 393 patients were included. The network meta-analysis showed that silver ion was superior to alginate, hydrogel, honey, sterile gauze and povidone-iodine gauze; Alginate was superior to sterile gauze and povidone-iodine gauze; Hydrogel was superior to povidone-iodine gauze; Honey was superior to sterile gauze and povidone-iodine gauze; Foam was superior to silver ion, alginate, hydrogel, honey, sterile gauze, povidone-iodine gauze and antibacterials gauze; Chitosan was superior to hydrogel, sterile gauze and povidone-iodine gauze; Antibacterials gauze was superior to sterile gauze and povidone-iodine gauze. All of the differences were statistically significant. Probability ranking according to SUCRA showed that there was a great possibility for foam and chitosan in the treatment of DF. Conclusion Based on the results of network meta-analysis and rank, foam dressing and chitosan dressing are superior to other dressings in the treatment of DF. More attentions should be made regarding comparisons directly of different dressing and reporting of cost-effective analysis.

Citation: HOUYu-ying, ZHANGZhi-gang, ZHANGJun, ZHANGJu-xia, WANGBo, YANGAi-ling, TIANJin-hui. Effects of Nine Different Dressings in the Treatment of Diabetic Foot: A Network Meta-analysis. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2016, 16(11): 1291-1297. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.20160196 Copy

  • Previous Article

    Selenium Supplementation for Treatment of Kashin-Beck Disease: A Network Meta-analysis
  • Next Article

    MammoSite Balloon Brachytherapy for Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation Following Breast-conserving Surgery for Patients with Early Stage Breast Cancer: A Single Arm Meta-analysis