Suppr超能文献

压力再分布垫或足跟保护装置能有效预防足跟压疮吗?

Are pressure redistribution surfaces or heel protection devices effective for preventing heel pressure ulcers?

机构信息

The Healing Touch, Inc, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA.

出版信息

J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2009 Nov-Dec;36(6):602-8. doi: 10.1097/WON.0b013e3181be282f.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Heel pressure ulcers are recognized as second in prevalence only to pressure ulcer (PU) on the heel among hospitalized patients, and recent studies suggest their incidence may be higher than even sacral ulcers.

OBJECTIVES

We systematically reviewed the literature to identify and evaluate whether pressure redistribution surfaces or heel protection devices are effective for the prevention of heel ulcers.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CINAHL and MEDLINE databases, using the keywords "pressure ulcer" and "heel," which we also searched the Cochrane Library, using the key terms "pressure ulcer," "heel," and "support surface." We hand searched the ancestry of pertinent research reports and review articles in order to identify additional studies. Inclusion criteria were (1) any study that compared one or more pressure redistribution surfaces or heel protection devices designed specifically to prevent heel PU and (2) any study comparing 2 or more pressure redistribution surfaces designed to prevent PU that specifically reported differences in the incidence of heel PU. Exclusion criteria were (1) studies that did not measure heel PU incidence as an outcome, (2) studies without an English language abstract, and (3) studies that reported overall PU incidence but did not analyze heel PU incidence separately.

RESULTS

Clinical evidence concerning the efficacy of pressure redistribution surfaces or heel protection devices is sparse. Existing evidence suggests that pressure redistribution surfaces vary in their ability to prevent heel pressure ulcers, but there is insufficient evidence to determine which surfaces are optimal for this purpose. A single study suggests that a wedge-shaped viscoelastic foam cushion is superior to standard foam pillows for preventing heel PU, but further research is needed before a definitive conclusion concerning this issue can be reached. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether heel protection devices are more effective than a standard hospital foam pillow for the prevention of heel PU. Research is urgently needed to determine the effectiveness of available heel protection devices for the prevention of heel PU. Studies should address efficacy among the available products and compare efficacy to standard foam pillows.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Given the paucity of clinical evidence, clinical decisions about the selection of an optimal device for preventing heel PU rely on a combination of existing evidence and clinical experience. While pressure redistribution devices may reduce tissue interface pressures at the heels, expert opinion and clinical experience concur that elevation of the heel is indicated to both reduce pressure and prevent shear and friction caused by frequent movement of the heel due to restlessness, reflex movements of the legs, or voluntary movement. A variety of heel protection devices are available that are designed to both relieve tissue interface pressure and protect the heel from shear and friction. Considerations for selecting an optimal heel protection device include its ability to elevate the heel off the underlying support surface while preventing foot-drop and rotation of the leg, the boot's ability to wick away temperature, its ability to be cleaned, whether it allows patient ambulation, its ability to remain in place despite patient movement, and its ability to remain in place without causing pressure to other surfaces of the foot.

摘要

背景

足跟部压疮是仅次于压疮(PU)的第二大常见住院患者皮肤问题,最近的研究表明,其发病率甚至可能高于骶尾部溃疡。

目的

我们系统地回顾了文献,以确定和评估压力再分布表面或足跟保护装置是否可有效预防足跟溃疡。

检索策略

我们使用关键词“压力溃疡”和“足跟”在 CINAHL 和 MEDLINE 数据库中进行检索,我们还在 Cochrane 图书馆使用了关键词“压力溃疡”、“足跟”和“支撑面”进行检索。我们还手动检索了相关研究报告和综述文章的起源,以确定其他研究。纳入标准为:(1)比较一种或多种专门用于预防足跟部压疮的压力再分布表面或足跟保护装置的任何研究;(2)将两种或更多种专门用于预防压疮的压力再分布表面进行比较,并报告足跟部压疮发生率差异的任何研究。排除标准为:(1)未将足跟部压疮发生率作为结果进行测量的研究;(2)没有英文摘要的研究;(3)报告总体压疮发生率但未单独分析足跟部压疮发生率的研究。

结果

关于压力再分布表面或足跟保护装置疗效的临床证据很少。现有证据表明,压力再分布表面在预防足跟部压疮的能力上存在差异,但尚无足够证据确定哪种表面最适合预防足跟部压疮。一项研究表明,楔形粘弹泡沫垫在预防足跟部压疮方面优于标准泡沫枕头,但在得出这一问题的明确结论之前,还需要进一步的研究。尚无足够证据确定足跟保护装置在预防足跟部压疮方面是否优于标准医院泡沫枕头。迫切需要研究现有的足跟保护装置在预防足跟部压疮方面的有效性。研究应针对现有产品的疗效,并将疗效与标准泡沫枕头进行比较。

临床意义

鉴于临床证据不足,选择预防足跟部压疮的最佳装置的临床决策取决于现有证据和临床经验的结合。虽然压力再分布装置可以降低足跟处的组织界面压力,但专家意见和临床经验一致认为,抬高足跟不仅可以降低压力,还可以防止由于躁动、腿部反射运动或自愿运动导致的足跟频繁移动而产生的剪切力和摩擦力。有多种足跟保护装置可用于缓解组织界面压力并保护足跟免受剪切力和摩擦力的影响。选择最佳足跟保护装置时需要考虑的因素包括:它是否能够抬起足跟离开基础支撑表面,同时防止足下垂和腿部旋转;靴子是否能够吸走热量;它是否易于清洁;它是否允许患者步行;它是否能够在患者移动时保持原位;以及它是否能够在不引起足部其他表面压力的情况下保持原位。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验