What do systematic reviews say?

Foam surfaces vs reactive gel 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 foam and gel surfaces

• Foam surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 182 participants
  Very low

Foam surfaces vs reactive foam and gel 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

Reactive air surfaces vs reactive water surfaces

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

• Reactive air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.43 [0.04, 4.29]
  1 study · 37 participants
  Very low

Reactive air surfaces vs reactive water surfaces

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

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

Reactive air surfaces vs reactive gel surfaces

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).

• Reactive air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.25 [0.56, 2.77]
  1 study · 66 participants
  Very low

Reactive air surfaces vs reactive gel surfaces

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

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

Reactive air surfaces vs foam surfaces

Reactive air surfaces may leads to lower proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer compared with foam surfaces (low certainty).

• Reactive air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.42 [0.18, 0.96]
  4 studies · 229 participants
  Low

Reactive air surfaces vs foam surfaces

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

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

Reactive fibre surfaces vs foam surfaces

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

• Alternative reactive support surfaces (non‐foam and non‐air‐filled) for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.86 [0.47, 1.57]
  1 study · 68 participants
  Very low

Reactive fibre surfaces vs foam surfaces

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Alternative reactive support surfaces (non‐foam and non‐air‐filled) for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Reactive gel surfaces vs reactive air surfaces

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).

• Alternative reactive support surfaces (non‐foam and non‐air‐filled) for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.8 [0.36, 1.77]
  1 study · 66 participants
  Very low

Reactive gel surfaces vs reactive air surfaces

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Alternative reactive support surfaces (non‐foam and non‐air‐filled) for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Reactive water surfaces vs reactive air surfaces

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

• Alternative reactive support surfaces (non‐foam and non‐air‐filled) for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 2.35 [0.23, 23.75]
  1 study · 37 participants
  Very low

Reactive water surfaces vs reactive air surfaces

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Alternative reactive support surfaces (non‐foam and non‐air‐filled) for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Reactive water surfaces vs foam surfaces

It is very uncertain whether reactive water surfaces changes proportion of participants with pressure ulcers completely healed compared with foam surfaces (very low certainty).

• Beds, overlays and mattresses for treating pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.07 [0.7, 1.63]
  1 study · 101 participants
  Very low

Reactive water surfaces vs foam surfaces

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• 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 foam surfaces

Reactive air surfaces showed no clear difference in proportion of participants with pressure ulcers completely healed compared with foam surfaces (low certainty).

• Beds, overlays and mattresses for treating pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.32 [0.96, 1.8]
  2 studies · 156 participants
  Low