Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

66 questions · 68 findings · 5 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 35 · 51.5%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 21 · 30.9%Low 10 · 14.7%Moderate 2 · 2.9%High 0 · 0%

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces vs reactive fibre surfaces

Health‐related quality of life · pressure ulcer prevention

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces vs reactive fibre surfaces

Cost‐effectiveness · pressure ulcer prevention

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces vs foam surfaces

Support surface associated patient comfort · pressure ulcer prevention

1 finding from 1 review

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 76 participants
Very low

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces vs foam surfaces

All reported adverse events · pressure ulcer prevention

1 finding from 1 review

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 2181 participants
Very low

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces vs foam surfaces

QoL · pressure ulcer prevention

2 findings from 1 review

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 267 participants
Low
Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 233 participants
Low

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces vs foam surfaces

Cost‐effectiveness · pressure ulcer prevention

1 finding from 1 review

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 1 participants
Moderate

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces on operating tables and subsequently on ward beds vs reactive gel surfaces on operating tables followed by foam surfaces on ward beds

Support surface associated patient comfort · pressure ulcer prevention

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces on operating tables and subsequently on ward beds vs reactive gel surfaces on operating tables followed by foam surfaces on ward beds

All reported adverse events · pressure ulcer prevention

1 finding from 1 review

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 198 participants
Very low

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces on operating tables and subsequently on ward beds vs reactive gel surfaces on operating tables followed by foam surfaces on ward beds

Health‐related quality of life · pressure ulcer prevention

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces on operating tables and subsequently on ward beds vs reactive gel surfaces on operating tables followed by foam surfaces on ward beds

Cost‐effectiveness · pressure ulcer prevention

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces vs foam surfaces

Ulcer healing · people with pressure ulcers

1 finding from 1 review

Beds, overlays and mattresses for treating pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 132 participants
Very low

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces vs foam surfaces

Time to complete healing of pressure ulcers ‐ not reported · people with pressure ulcers

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Beds, overlays and mattresses for treating pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Reactive air surfaces vs alternating pressure (active) air surfaces

Proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer · pressure ulcer prevention

It is very uncertain whether reactive air surfaces changes proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer compared with alternating pressure (active) air surfaces (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Reactive air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.62 [0.35, 1.11]
6 studies · 1648 participants
Very low

Reactive air surfaces vs alternating pressure (active) air surfaces

Time to pressure ulcer development · pressure ulcer prevention

Reactive air surfaces may leads to lower time to pressure ulcer incidence compared with alternating pressure (active) air surfaces (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Reactive air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
HR 0.44 [0.21, 0.96]
1 study · 308 participants
Low

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces vs foam surfaces

Support surface associated patient comfort · people with pressure ulcers

1 finding from 1 review

Beds, overlays and mattresses for treating pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 39 participants
Very low

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces vs foam surfaces

All reported adverse events · people with pressure ulcers

1 finding from 1 review

Beds, overlays and mattresses for treating pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 49 participants
Very low

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces vs foam surfaces

Health‐related quality of life · people with pressure ulcers

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Beds, overlays and mattresses for treating pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces vs foam surfaces

Cost‐effectiveness · people with pressure ulcers

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Beds, overlays and mattresses for treating pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Reactive air surfaces vs alternating pressure (active) air surfaces

Support surface associated patient comfort · pressure ulcer prevention

1 finding from 1 review

Reactive air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
4 studies · 1364 participants
Very low

Reactive air surfaces vs alternating pressure (active) air surfaces

All reported adverse events · pressure ulcer prevention

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Reactive air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found