The value of systematic evaluation in determining the effectiveness and practical utility of a pressure-redistributing support surface

References 

1. Schoonhoven L, Bousema M, Buskens E. The prevalence and incidence of pressure ulcers in hospitalised patients in the Netherlands: a prospective inception cohort study. International Journal of Nursing Studies. 2007;44:927–935
   • Abstract
   • Full Text
   • Full-Text PDF (156 KB)
   • CrossRef
2. Vanderwee K, Clark M, Dealey C, et al. Pressure ulcer prevalence in Europe: a pilot study. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. 2007;13(2):227–235
   • MEDLINE
   • CrossRef
3. Gallagher P, Barry P, Hartigan I, et al. Prevalence of pressure ulcers in three university teaching hospitals in Ireland. Journal of Tissue Viability. 2008;17:103–109
   • Abstract
   • Full Text
   • Full-Text PDF (125 KB)
4. Posnett J, Gottrup F, Lundgren H, et al. The resource impact of wounds on health-care providers in Europe. Journal of Wound Care. 2009;18(4):154
5. Buttery J, Phillips L. Pressure ulcer audit highlights important gaps in the delivery of preventative care in England and Wales 2005–2008. EWMA Journal. 2009;9(3):27–31
6. Bennett G, Dealey C, Posnett J. The cost of pressure ulcers in the UK. Age and Ageing. 2004;33(30):230–235
   • MEDLINE
   • CrossRef
7. Gorecki C, Brown JM, Nelson EA, et al. Impact of pressure ulcers on quality of life in older patients: a systematic review. Journal of the American Geriatric Society. 2009;57(7):1175–1183
8. Clark M. Changing pressure-redistributing mattress stocks: costs and outcomes. British Journal of Nursing. 2005;14(6):S30–S32
9. Phillips L. Optimise outcomes and reduce clinical risk by setting up the pressure relieving equipment correctly. Nurse2Nurse. 2004;4(3):1–5
10. Goossens R, Rithalia SVS. Physiological response of the heel tissue on pressure relief between three alternating pressure air mattresses. Journal of Tissue Viability. 2008;17(1):10–14
    • Abstract
    • Full Text
    • Full-Text PDF (265 KB)
11. Fletcher J. Equipment selection. In: Science and practice of pressure ulcer management. London: Springer; 2006;
12. EPUAP , NPUAP . Pressure ulcer prevention and treatment full guideline. www.epuap.org2009;[accessed November 2009]
13. Iglesias C, Nixon J, Cranny G, et al. Pressure relieving support surfaces trial: cost effectiveness analysis. BMJ. 2006;(7555):1416
14. Fleurence R. Cost-effectiveness of pressure-relieving devices for the prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2005;21(3):334–341
    • MEDLINE
15. Clark M. Models of pressure ulcer care: costs and outcomes. British Journal of Health Care Management. 2001;7(10):412–416
16. ArjoHuntleigh data on file.
17. Rithalia S. Assessment of patient support surfaces: principle, practice and limitations. Journal of Medical Engineering and Technology. 2005;29(4):163–169
18. Vowden P. Does wound care require an alternative to the randomised trial to evaluate product effectiveness?. EWMA Journal. 2009;9(2):47
19. Clark M. Pressure ulcer prevention. In: The prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers. London: Mosby; 2001;
20. Clark M, Benbow M, Butcher M, et al. Collecting pressure ulcer prevention and management outcomes: 1. British Journal of Nursing. 2002;11(4):230–238
21. Van Rijswijk L. It's all about the “E”. Ostomy Wound Management. 2009;55(6):4–6