What do systematic reviews say?

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 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 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 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 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

Hydropolymer foam dressing vs silicone foam dressing

It is very uncertain whether hydropolymer foam dressing changes incidence of healed pressure ulcers, short‐term compared with silicone foam dressing (very low certainty).

• Foam dressings for treating pressure ulcers 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.89 [0.45, 1.75]
  1 study · 38 participants
  Very low

Hydropolymer foam dressing vs silicone foam dressing

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Foam dressings for treating pressure ulcers 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Hydropolymer foam dressing vs silicone foam dressing

It is very uncertain whether hydropolymer foam dressing changes adverse events, short‐term compared with silicone foam dressing (very low certainty).

• Foam dressings for treating pressure ulcers 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.37 [0.04, 3.25]
  1 study · 38 participants
  Very low

Hydropolymer foam dressing vs silicone foam dressing

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Foam dressings for treating pressure ulcers 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

polyurethane foam dressing vs hydrocellular foam dressing

polyurethane foam dressing showed no clear difference in time to healing compared with hydrocellular foam dressing (low certainty).

• Foam dressings for venous leg ulcers 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.24 [0.91, 1.49]
  1 study · 156 participants
  Low
• Foam dressings for venous leg ulcers 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.03 [0.6, 1.78]
  1 study · 118 participants
  Low
• Foam dressings for venous leg ulcers 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.6 [0.75, 3.42]
  1 study · 18 participants
  Low

polyurethane foam dressing vs hydrocellular foam dressing

• Foam dressings for venous leg ulcers 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies · 0 participants
  GRADE not reported

polyurethane foam dressing vs hydrocellular foam dressing

polyurethane foam dressing showed no clear difference in proportion of participants experiencing adverse events compared with hydrocellular foam dressing (low certainty).

• Foam dressings for venous leg ulcers 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.13 [0.69, 1.85]
  1 study · 156 participants
  Low

polyurethane foam dressing vs hydrocellular foam dressing

• Foam dressings for venous leg ulcers 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies · 0 participants
  GRADE not reported

Foam surfaces vs alternating pressure (active) air surfaces

Foam surfaces showed no clear difference in proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer compared with alternating pressure (active) air surfaces (low certainty).

• Foam surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.59 [0.86, 2.95]
  4 studies · 2247 participants
  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

• 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 fibre surfaces

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

• Foam surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.17 [0.64, 2.14]
  1 study · 68 participants
  Very low