***TASK***
the task is to simplify the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***INPUT***
the input is the abstract of a biomedical literature

***OUTPUT***
the output is the simplified abstract for the input abstract of a biomedical literature

***DOCUMENTATION***

***EXAMPLES***

Input: We included five RCTs (2277 participants) that compared different frequencies of CVAD dressing changes. The studies were all conducted in Europe and published between 1995 and 2009. Participants were recruited from the intensive care and cancer care departments of one children's and four adult hospitals. The studies used a variety of transparent dressings and compared a longer interval between dressing changes (5 to15 days; intervention) with a shorter interval between changes (2 to 5 days; control). In each study participants were followed up until the CVAD was removed or until discharge from ICU or hospital. Confirmed catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) One trial randomised 995 people receiving central venous catheters to a longer or shorter interval between dressing changes and measured CRBSI. It is unclear whether there is a difference in the risk of CRBSI between people having long or short intervals between dressing changes (RR 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 4.98) (low quality evidence). Suspected catheter-related bloodstream infection Two trials randomised a total of 151 participants to longer or shorter dressing intervals and measured suspected CRBSI. It is unclear whether there is a difference in the risk of suspected CRBSI between people having long or short intervals between dressing changes (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.23 to 2.10) (low quality evidence). All cause mortality Three trials randomised a total of 896 participants to longer or shorter dressing intervals and measured all cause mortality. It is unclear whether there is a difference in the risk of death from any cause between people having long or short intervals between dressing changes (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.25) (low quality evidence). Catheter-site infection Two trials randomised a total of 371 participants to longer or shorter dressing intervals and measured catheter-site infection. It is unclear whether there is a difference in risk of catheter-site infection between people having long or short intervals between dressing changes (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.63) (low quality evidence). Skin damage One small trial (112 children) and three trials (1475 adults) measured skin damage. There was very low quality evidence for the effect of long intervals between dressing changes on skin damage compared with short intervals (children: RR of scoring ≥ 2 on the skin damage scale 0.33, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.68; data for adults not pooled). Pain Two studies involving 193 participants measured pain. It is unclear if there is a difference between long and short interval dressing changes on pain during dressing removal (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.38) (low quality evidence). The best available evidence is currently inconclusive regarding whether longer intervals between CVAD dressing changes are associated with more or less catheter-related infection, mortality or pain than shorter intervals.
Output:

The five studies that were included in the review were published between 1995 and 2009 and involved a total of 2277 participants. Four countries were represented (two studies from France and one each from Italy, Sweden, and the Czech Republic). One study involved children and the remaining four trials included only adults. Four of the studies included cancer patients and one included patients in an intensive care unit. We classified the time intervals between dressing changes as short (2 - 5 days) in the more frequently changed dressings group and long (5-15 days) in the less frequently changed group. All studies used transparent dressings made of synthetic materials and two studies used gauze (a fabric dressing that does not stick to the skin) secured with tape when skin was damaged. CVAD dressings were monitored on a daily basis in all trials and participants were followed up at least until the CVAD was removed or until discharge. In one study, the manufacturer provided one of the products, but had no influence in the design or how the results were analysed and reported. The current evidence leaves us uncertain whether the frequency of dressing changes for CVADs influences risk of CRBSI or death. Of particular interest to patients are problems that may be associated with the dressing themselves, such as pain when they are removed and the skin damage that the dressing may cause. We found no clear evidence that pain, which was assessed daily, was affected by the frequency of dressing changes. The quality of the evidence was very low or low. We downgraded quality because of small and few studies, poor study designs and differences in results between the studies. Better designed studies are still needed to show whether longer interval or shorter intervals between dressing changes are more effective in preventing catheter related infections, mortality, skin damage, dressing removal pain, quality of life and cost. This plain language summary is up-to-date as of 10 June 2015.