ReviewThe journal of the American College of Certified Wound Specialists2010
Use of alternatives to air-fluidized support surfaces in the care of complex wounds in postflap and postgraft patients.
Review in The journal of the American College of Certified Wound Specialists, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Air-fluidized support surface therapy has many drawbacks, such as dehydration, in an already difficult recovery for those wound patients who have undergone flap and graft surgery. In addition, patient care and handling are also problematic. Patients complain of discomfort, and the instability of the surface interferes with patient stability in side lying and semi-Fowler's positions. Alternative support surfaces can be considered for postflap or postgraft patients. Such technologies as alternating pressure, low-air-loss, and therapeutic nonpowered, advanced, and lateral rotation surfaces are widely used for pressure management in high-risk patients and those with existing pressure ulcers. These surfaces must be used within a total pressure ulcer management program that includes frequent turning and repositioning, skin and ulcer care according to evidence-based protocols, patient and caregiver instruction, nutrition, and offloading and positioning. The proposed recommendations require more research on the relative effectiveness of less expensive and more user-friendly support surfaces such as low-air-loss and nonpowered advanced support surfaces and is necessary in order to conclusively recommend one type of surface over another. However, at this time the available clinical studies and opinions remain positive.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.