M Augustin1, K Herberger. 1. CVderm-Competenzzentrum Versorgungsforschung in der Dermatologie und Hochschulambulanz für Wunden Klinik und Poliklinik für Dermatologie und Venerologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg. m.augustin@uke.uni-hamburg.de
Abstract
GOALS: Establish the benefits and limitations of vacuum-assisted wound closure therapy (VWT) on the basis on "best evidence". METHODS: The core of the review was an internet-based literature search based on the criteria of the Cochrane Collaboration, supplemented by an additional manual search. The identified literature was evaluated and selected following a specified algorithm. The therapeutic benefit was determined using the current benefit definitions of SGB V, GBA and IQWiG, with emphasis on the patient's perspective and on daily routine. RESULTS: The online search revealed n=674 publications on VWT. After the additional manual searching, a total of n=269 original papers filled the criteria for evaluation. The criteria and methods of evaluation for so varied in the clinical studies despite the same indications that no comparative meta-analyses of individual therapy goals could be carried out. Most studies also revealed methodological deficits. A majority of analyzed studies indicate an effectiveness and clinical benefit for VWT. CONCLUSION: VWT is a standard approach in Germany for treating problematic acute and chronic wounds. It is often an essential treatment option given it's effectiveness in many indications. VWT also has marked clinical benefits from the patient's perspective.
GOALS: Establish the benefits and limitations of vacuum-assisted wound closure therapy (VWT) on the basis on "best evidence". METHODS: The core of the review was an internet-based literature search based on the criteria of the Cochrane Collaboration, supplemented by an additional manual search. The identified literature was evaluated and selected following a specified algorithm. The therapeutic benefit was determined using the current benefit definitions of SGB V, GBA and IQWiG, with emphasis on the patient's perspective and on daily routine. RESULTS: The online search revealed n=674 publications on VWT. After the additional manual searching, a total of n=269 original papers filled the criteria for evaluation. The criteria and methods of evaluation for so varied in the clinical studies despite the same indications that no comparative meta-analyses of individual therapy goals could be carried out. Most studies also revealed methodological deficits. A majority of analyzed studies indicate an effectiveness and clinical benefit for VWT. CONCLUSION: VWT is a standard approach in Germany for treating problematic acute and chronic wounds. It is often an essential treatment option given it's effectiveness in many indications. VWT also has marked clinical benefits from the patient's perspective.
Authors: Adrian Dragu; Stefan Schnürer; Frank Unglaub; Maya B Wolf; Justus P Beier; Ulrich Kneser; Raymund E Horch Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2011-11 Impact factor: 4.129