Wells J A, Karr D
Center for Health Policy Studies, Columbia, Maryland 21044, USA.
Ostomy Wound Manage. 1998 Feb;44(2):38-42, 44-6, 48 passim.
In this study, a non-powered fluid mattress (hereafter referred to as study mattress) was evaluated in terms of interface pressure, wound healing, and patient/practitioner satisfaction. The study was divided into two parts. Twenty-two (22) volunteers placed on the study mattress were used to evaluate interface pressure. Pressure ulcer healing and cost of study mattress were evaluated for 36 stage I-IV pressure ulcers and 24 surgically repaired ulcers in 33 consecutively recruited patients. Additionally, patient and practitioner satisfaction with the support surface was assessed at the completion of the study. Direct comparison of interface pressures with air-fluidized and low-air-loss beds indicate that the study mattress relieves pressure as well as existing technology. Wounds of patients on the study mattress healed at an average rate of 31 percent per week (median 25 percent per week) and flapped wounds healed an average of 7.7 weeks. No new ulcers occurred among patients using the study mattress. Both patients and practitioners reported satisfaction with the comfort and performance of the study mattress and felt it compared favorably with air-fluidized and low-air-loss technologies.
在本研究中，对一种无动力流体床垫（以下简称研究床垫）进行了界面压力、伤口愈合以及患者/从业者满意度方面的评估。该研究分为两个部分。22名躺在研究床垫上的志愿者被用于评估界面压力。对连续招募的33例患者中的36处I - IV期压疮和24处手术修复的溃疡评估了压疮愈合情况及研究床垫的成本。此外，在研究结束时评估了患者和从业者对支撑面的满意度。与气悬浮床和低气耗床的界面压力直接比较表明，研究床垫缓解压力的效果与现有技术相当。使用研究床垫的患者伤口平均每周愈合31%（中位数为每周25%），皮瓣伤口平均愈合7.7周。使用研究床垫的患者中未出现新的溃疡。患者和从业者均对研究床垫的舒适度和性能表示满意，并认为其与气悬浮床和低气耗技术相比具有优势。
