Reactive air surfaces vs reactive water surfaces
Health‐related quality of life · pressure ulcer prevention
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extractedStudies not reportedNo studies found
Findings
What do systematic reviews say?
602 questions · 963 findings · 90 reviews
No studies found 118 · 12.3%GRADE not reported 578 · 60%Very low 93 · 9.7%Low 92 · 9.6%Moderate 59 · 6.1%High 23 · 2.4%
Reactive air surfaces vs reactive water surfaces
Cost‐effectiveness · pressure ulcer prevention
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extractedStudies not reportedNo studies found
Reactive air surfaces vs reactive gel 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 reactive gel surfaces (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
- RR 1.25 [0.56, 2.77]1 study · 66 participantsVery 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
- HR 0.44 [0.21, 0.96]1 study · 308 participantsLow
Reactive air surfaces vs reactive gel surfaces
Time to pressure ulcer development · pressure ulcer prevention
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extractedStudies not reportedNo studies found
Reactive air surfaces vs reactive gel surfaces
All reported adverse events · pressure ulcer prevention
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extractedStudies not reportedNo studies found
Reactive air surfaces vs reactive gel surfaces
Health‐related quality of life · pressure ulcer prevention
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extractedStudies not reportedNo studies found
Reactive air surfaces vs reactive gel surfaces
Cost‐effectiveness · pressure ulcer prevention
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extractedStudies not reportedNo studies found
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
- no estimate extractedStudies not reportedNo studies found
Reactive air surfaces vs alternating pressure (active) air surfaces
Health‐related quality of life · pressure ulcer prevention
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extractedStudies not reportedNo studies found
Reactive air surfaces vs alternating pressure (active) air surfaces
Cost‐effectiveness · pressure ulcer prevention
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extractedStudies not reportedNo studies found
Reactive air surfaces vs foam surfaces
Proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer · pressure ulcer prevention
Reactive air surfaces may leads to lower proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer compared with foam surfaces (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
- RR 0.42 [0.18, 0.96]4 studies · 229 participantsLow
Reactive air surfaces vs foam surfaces
Time to pressure ulcer development · pressure ulcer prevention
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extractedStudies not reportedNo studies found
Reactive gel surfaces vs reactive air surfaces
Proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer · preventing pressure ulcers
It is very uncertain whether reactive gel surfaces changes proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer compared with reactive air surfaces (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
- Alternative reactive support surfaces (non‐foam and non‐air‐filled) for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyRR 0.8 [0.36, 1.77]1 study · 66 participantsVery low
Reactive gel surfaces vs reactive air surfaces
Time to pressure ulcer development · preventing pressure ulcers
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
- Alternative reactive support surfaces (non‐foam and non‐air‐filled) for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyno estimate extractedStudies not reportedNo studies found
Reactive gel surfaces vs reactive air surfaces
All reported adverse events · preventing pressure ulcers
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
- Alternative reactive support surfaces (non‐foam and non‐air‐filled) for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyno estimate extractedStudies not reportedNo studies found
Reactive gel surfaces vs reactive air surfaces
Health‐related quality of life · preventing pressure ulcers
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
- Alternative reactive support surfaces (non‐foam and non‐air‐filled) for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyno estimate extractedStudies not reportedNo studies found
Reactive gel surfaces vs reactive air surfaces
Cost‐effectiveness · preventing pressure ulcers
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
- Alternative reactive support surfaces (non‐foam and non‐air‐filled) for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyno estimate extractedStudies not reportedNo studies found
Reactive water surfaces vs alternating pressure (active) air surfaces
Proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer · preventing pressure ulcers
It is very uncertain whether reactive water 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
- Alternative reactive support surfaces (non‐foam and non‐air‐filled) for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyRR 0.83 [0.35, 1.93]2 studies · 358 participantsVery low
Reactive water surfaces vs reactive air surfaces
All reported adverse events · preventing pressure ulcers
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
- Alternative reactive support surfaces (non‐foam and non‐air‐filled) for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyno estimate extractedStudies not reportedNo studies found