What do systematic reviews say?

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces vs reactive fibre surfaces

• Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 187 participants
  Very low

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces vs reactive fibre surfaces

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• 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

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• 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

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• 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

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces on operating tables and… may leads to lower proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer compared with reactive gel surfaces on operating tables followed by foam surfaces… (low certainty).

• Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.22 [0.06, 0.76]
  2 studies · 415 participants
  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

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• 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

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• 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

• 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

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• 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

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

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

Foam surfaces vs reactive air surfaces

• Foam surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 72 participants
  Very low

Foam surfaces vs reactive air surfaces

• Foam surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 72 participants
  Very low

Foam surfaces vs reactive air surfaces

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

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

Foam surfaces vs reactive air surfaces

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

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

Foam surfaces vs reactive air surfaces

Foam surfaces may leads to higher proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer compared with reactive air surfaces (low certainty).

• Foam surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 2.4 [1.04, 5.54]
  4 studies · 229 participants
  Low

Foam surfaces vs reactive air surfaces

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

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