Question · asked by 1 review
Foam surfaces vs alternating pressure (active) air surfaces: All reported adverse events
- Population
- pressure ulcer prevention
- Intervention
- Foam surfaces
- Comparison
- alternating pressure (active) air surfaces
- Outcome
- All reported adverse events
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Foam surfaces vs alternating pressure (active) air surfaces All reported adverse events · pressure ulcer prevention Foam surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers (2021) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 2181 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Foam surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | Not extracted | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Foam surfaces vs reactive gel surfaces · pressure ulcer prevention · 1 review
- Foam surfaces vs reactive fibre surfaces · pressure ulcer prevention · 1 review
- Foam surfaces vs reactive air surfaces · pressure ulcer prevention · 1 review
- Foam surfaces vs reactive foam and gel surfaces · pressure ulcer prevention · 1 review
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.