Trial reportJAMA network open2023
Effect of a Continuous Bedside Pressure Mapping System for Reducing Interface Pressures: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02325388 (Effectiveness of a Pressure-sensing System to Reduce the Risk of Pressure Ulcer Formation by Lowering Interface Pressure in Vulnerable Patient Populations), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
Effectiveness of a Pressure-sensing System to Reduce the Risk of Pressure Ulcer Formation by Lowering Interface Pressure in Vulnerable Patient Populations: A Parallel-two-group Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring Continuous Pressure Monitoring to Inform Decisions for Pressure Injuries in the Community: Secondary Analysis Using a Mobility and Pressure Exposure Algorithm.International wound journal · 2026Article
- Effects of nursing interventions for pressure injury prevention using real-time pressure mapping: a randomized controlled trial.BMC nursing · 2026Article
- Assessment of Load in Replacement of Bilateral Edentulous Mandibular Posteriors by Precision Attachments: A Clinical Study.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2025Article
- Impact of Mattress Use on Sacral Interface Pressure in Community-Dwelling Older Adults.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Sitting Pressure Measurements in Wheelchair Users-Can the Effects of Daily Relief Activities Be Depicted?Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Continuous bedside pressure mapping (CBPM) technology can assist in detecting skin areas with excessive interface pressure and inform efficient patient repositioning to prevent the development of pressure injuries (PI). Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of CBPM technology in reducing interface pressure and the incidence of PIs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This parallel, 2-group randomized clinical trial was performed at a tertiary acute care center. The study started to enroll participants in December 2014 and was completed in May 2018. Participants included adults partially or completely dependent for bed mobility. Statistical analysis was performed from September 2018 to December 2022. Intervention: Nursing staff using visual feedback from CBPM technology for 72 hours. Main Outcomes and Measures: Absolute number of sensing points with pressure readings greater than 40 mm Hg, mean interface pressure across all sensing points under a patient's body, proportion of participants who had pressure readings greater than 40 mm Hg, and pressure-related skin and soft tissue changes. Results: There were 678 patients recruited. After attrition, 260 allocated to the control group (151 [58.1%] male; mean [SD] age, 61.9 [18.5] years) and 247 in the intervention group (147 [59.5%] male; mean [SD] age, 63.6 [18.1] years) were included in analyses. The absolute number of sensing points with pressures greater than 40 mm Hg were 11 033 in the control group vs 9314 in the intervention group (P = .16). The mean (SD) interface pressure was 6.80 (1.63) mm Hg in the control group vs 6.62 (1.51) mm Hg in the intervention group (P = .18). The proportion of participants who had pressure readings greater than 40 mm Hg was 99.6% in both the control and intervention groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy of CBPM technology in the reduction of interface pressure and the incidence of PIs in a tertiary acute care center, no statistically significant benefit was seen for any of the primary outcomes. These results suggest that longer duration of monitoring and adequately powered studies where CBPM feedback is integrated into a multifaceted intervention to prevent PI are needed. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02325388.
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.