A Study of the Performance of a Pressure Reducing Foam Mattress After Three Years of Use

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0965-206X(98)80040-5Get rights and content

Summary

This paper details the follow up clinical evaluation of a pressure reducing foam mattress (PRFM) three years after a randomised controlled trial. The PRFMs involved in the 1993 randomised controlled trial were used constantly for three years and recalled in 1996. In the original trial the control group had consisted of 18 standard NHS mattresses. In 1996 none of these mattresses were still in use which made it impossible to replicate the 1993 randomised controlled trial. Instead a clinical evaluation using the 1993 methods was carried out using the PRFMs only.

Recruitment to the evaluation proved difficult because changes in clinical practice between the two studies had resulted in shorter lengths of stay in hospital for the target population. Comparison of the two outcome measures namely pressure sore incidence and the subjects' perception of comfort showed no statistically significant change between 1993 and 1996. With the exception of two damaged mattress covers all of the original foam components and covers remained in working order in 1996. During the time between the two studies, a pressure sore prevention programme was implemented within the research area. This programme has resulted in a year by year drop in the Directorate incidence rate. It is therefore not possible to attribute the low pressure sore incidence rate to the PRFMs alone. The results obtained suggest that the PRFMs appear to be providing a similar level of performance after three years of use.

References (7)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (15)

  • Pressure ulcers: Prevention and management

    2019, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology
    Citation Excerpt :

    Notably, however, the “standard” mattresses in all these studies are typically poorly defined and variable by location and time. Among the various alternative foam mattresses, head-to-head comparisons have failed to show any significant differences.12,14,17 High-specification foam mattresses with air overlays have not shown any benefit over the foam mattress alone.12,18

  • Preventing pressure ulcers-Are pressure-redistributing support surfaces effective? A Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis

    2012, International Journal of Nursing Studies
    Citation Excerpt :

    Methods of randomisation used included table of random numbers, automated phone systems and computerised random number generators. Adequate allocation concealment – defined as those involved in enrolling participants not being able to foresee allocation through the use of central allocation, including telephone or web-based randomisation, or sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes – was evident in 16 trials (Cadue et al., 2008; Cobb et al., 1997; Cooper et al., 1998; Economides et al., 1995; Geyer et al., 2001; Gray et al., 1998; Jolley et al., 2004; Keogh and Dealey, 2001; Mistiaen et al., 2009; Nixon et al., 2006, 1998; Sanada et al., 2003; Taylor, 1999; Theaker et al., 2005; Vanderwee et al., 2005; Whitney et al., 1984). Blinding of outcome assessment was reported in 10 trials (Cavicchioli and Carella, 2007; Conine et al., 1990, 1994; Feuchtinger et al., 2006; Geyer et al., 2001; Gray et al., 1998; Nixon et al., 1998; Russell et al., 2000; Schultz, 1998; Theaker et al., 2005).

  • Beds, overlays and mattresses for treating pressure ulcers

    2021, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text