Pressure‐relieving devices for treating heel pressure ulcers

Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Ir a:

Figure 1

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Figure 2

Flow chart for patients with heel ulcers recruited by Russell (2000) in the study

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Nimbus system compared with Cairwave system, Outcome 1 Heel ulcer healed.

Table 1. Leeds Teaching Hospitals heel ulcer prevalence

Table 1. Leeds Teaching Hospitals heel ulcer prevalence

Table 2. Patient assessment of mattress comfort

	Q1a	Q1b	Q2	N
Nimbus (completed)	1.71 (± 0.68)	2.48 (± 1.32)	2.81 (± 0.96)	29
Cairwave (completed)	1.94 (± 0.82)	2.04 (± 1.30)	2.46 (± 0.92)	24
Nimbus (discontinued)	2.33 (± 1.81)	2.25 (± 1.89)	2.50 (± 1.0)	4
Cairwave (discontinued)	2.51 (± 1.04)	3.50 (± 1.69)	3.56 (± 1.12)	8
Q1 a and b refer to mattress comfort, Q2 asked about sleep. Results are mean comfort scores from visual analogue scale (± standard deviation). Results are from both heel ulcer and sacral ulcer participants. All results were not significant.

Table 2. Patient assessment of mattress comfort

Comparison 1. Nimbus system compared with Cairwave system

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Heel ulcer healed Show forest plot	1	113	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.49 [0.90, 2.45]

Comparison 1. Nimbus system compared with Cairwave system