Question · asked by 1 review
Reactive fibre surfaces vs alternating pressure (active) air surfaces: Support surface associated patient comfort
- Population
- preventing pressure ulcers
- Intervention
- Reactive fibre surfaces
- Comparison
- alternating pressure (active) air surfaces
- Outcome
- Support surface associated patient comfort
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Reactive fibre surfaces vs alternating pressure (active) air surfaces Support surface associated patient comfort · preventing pressure ulcers Alternative reactive support surfaces (non‐foam and non‐air‐filled) for preventing pressure ulcers (2021) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 187 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alternative reactive support surfaces (non‐foam and non‐air‐filled) 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.
- Reactive fibre surfaces vs foam surfaces · preventing pressure ulcers · 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.