Department of Angiology, HELIOS Klinik Krefeld, Lutherplatz 40, Krefeld, Germany.
Int Wound J. 2011 Dec;8(6):578-84. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-481X.2011.00814.x. Epub 2011 Oct 17.
We analysed the effect of different body features on contact area, interface pressure and pressure distribution of three different mattresses. Thirty-eight volunteers (age ranged from 17 to 73 years, 23 females) were asked to lie on three different mattresses in a random order: I, standard hospital foam mattresses; II, higher specification foam mattresses (Viscorelax Sure® ); III, constant low pressure devices (CareMedx® , AirSystems). Measurements were performed in supine position and in a 90° left- and right-sided position, respectively, using a full-body mat (pressure mapping device Xsensor X2-Modell). Outcome variables were contact area (CA) in cm(2) , mean interface pressure (IP) in mmHg and pressure distribution (PD) estimated as rate of low pressures between 5 and 33 mmHg on each mattress in percent. Mean CA was lowest in the standard hospital foam mattresses and increased in the higher specification foam mattresses and was highest in the constant low pressure device (supine position: 491 ± 86 cm(2) , 615 ± 95 cm(2) , 685 ± 116 cm(2) ). Mean IP was highest in the standard hospital foam mattresses and lower but similar in the higher specification foam mattresses and the constant low pressure devices (supine position: 22·3 ± 1·5 mmHg, 17·6 ± 1·7 mmHg, 17·6 ± 2·2 mmHg). Models were estimated for CA, IP and PD including the independent variables height, weight and waist-to-hip-ratio (WHR). They show that body morphology seems to play a minor role for CA, IP and PD, but very thin and tall patients and very small and obese people might benefit from different mattresses. Our data show that CA increases with increasing specification of mattresses. Higher specification foam mattresses and constant low pressure devices show similar IP, but constant low pressure devices show a wider pressure distribution. Body morphology should be considered to optimise prevention for single patients.
我们分析了不同身体特征对三种不同床垫接触面积、界面压力和压力分布的影响。38 名志愿者(年龄 17 至 73 岁,23 名女性)被要求以随机顺序躺在三种不同的床垫上:I,标准医院泡沫床垫;II,更高规格的泡沫床垫(Viscorelax Sure®);III,恒压低压力装置(CareMedx®,AirSystems)。分别在仰卧位和 90°左侧卧位和右侧卧位下使用全身垫(压力映射装置 Xsensor X2-Modell)进行测量。结果变量为接触面积(CA)以平方厘米(cm2)表示、平均界面压力(IP)以毫米汞柱(mmHg)表示,以及以每种床垫 5 至 33mmHg 之间的低压力率估计的压力分布(PD),以百分比表示。标准医院泡沫床垫的平均 CA 最低,较高规格的泡沫床垫的 CA 增加,恒压低压力装置的 CA 最高(仰卧位:491±86cm2、615±95cm2、685±116cm2)。标准医院泡沫床垫的平均 IP 最高,而较高规格的泡沫床垫和恒压低压力装置的 IP 较低但相似(仰卧位:22.3±1.5mmHg、17.6±1.7mmHg、17.6±2.2mmHg)。模型包括身高、体重和腰臀比(WHR)等独立变量,用于估计 CA、IP 和 PD。结果表明,身体形态对 CA、IP 和 PD 的影响较小,但非常瘦高和非常矮小肥胖的患者可能会从不同的床垫中受益。我们的数据表明,CA 随着床垫规格的提高而增加。较高规格的泡沫床垫和恒压低压力装置的 IP 相似,但恒压低压力装置的压力分布更广。应考虑身体形态,以优化单个患者的预防措施。