Thompson-Bishop J Y, Mottola C M
Decubitus. 1992 Mar;5(2):42-6, 48.
This pilot study examined the pressure-reducing properties of 11 different pressure-reducing devices as compared to a standard hospital mattress. Mean trochanteric and heel pressure readings were obtained on each surface from 13 healthy adult volunteers by using an electropneumatic pressure transducer (Gaymar, catalog # PSM1). Mean trochanteric pressures ranged from 37.2 mm Hg to 55.1 mm Hg on the pressure-reducing support surfaces as compared to 83.6 mm Hg on a standard hospital mattress. Mean heel pressure readings ranged from 28.1 mm Hg to 62.1 mm Hg on the pressure-reducing support surfaces as compared to 93.9 mm Hg on the standard hospital mattress. While pressure-reducing support surfaces were found to yield significantly lower mean pressure readings than the standard hospital mattress, none of them is capable of preventing tissue ischemia if the subcutaneous pressure is three to five times higher than the interface pressure.
这项初步研究将11种不同的减压装置与标准医院床垫进行了比较,以检测其减压性能。通过使用电动气动压力传感器(Gaymar,产品目录编号PSM1),从13名健康成年志愿者身上获取了每个表面的平均转子和足跟压力读数。与标准医院床垫上的83.6毫米汞柱相比,减压支撑表面上的平均转子压力范围为37.2毫米汞柱至55.1毫米汞柱。与标准医院床垫上的93.9毫米汞柱相比,减压支撑表面上的平均足跟压力读数范围为28.1毫米汞柱至62.1毫米汞柱。虽然发现减压支撑表面产生的平均压力读数明显低于标准医院床垫,但如果皮下压力比界面压力高三到五倍,它们中没有一个能够预防组织缺血。