Price 1999.

Methods	RCT with follow‐up 14 days postoperatively.
Participants	Patients with fractured neck of femur and Medley score of > 25 (very high risk), aged over 60 y.
Interventions	1. Repose system (low‐pressure inflatable mattress and cushion in polyurethane material) (n = 40). 2. Nimbus III dynamic flotation plus TransCell cushion (n = 40): all other care standard best practice, including regular repositioning.
Outcomes	1. Repose system: at admission 14/40 has pressure ulcers; preoperatively, 7/36; at 7 days: 6/32; at 14 days: 5/24. 2. Nimbus III: at admission had pressure ulcers, 13/40; preoperatively, 8/37; at 7 days: 5/31; at 14 days: 4/26.
Notes	80 patients randomised; 50 featured in final analysis (assessed 14 days post‐operatively) i.e. 38% attrition. Patients with pressure ulcers recruited. Difficult to ascertain how many of those with existing pressure ulcer included in 7‐day and 14‐day follow up assessments (see Table 4 of paper)
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Stated, "a concealed computer‐generated list was used to randomise eligible consecutive consenting patients to one of the support systems".
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not reported.
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) Pressure ulcer incidence	High risk	“Patients were not assessed blindly as it was considered that displacement for examination would cause excessive discomfort”.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	“No patient was excluded from the analyses. In many patients the data were incomplete, but they have been included in the analyses for those time points where data are present”; data from 50 (out of 80 patients) only analysed for final assessment.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All pre‐specified outcomes reported.
Free of other bias ‐ were groups similar at baseline regarding the most important prognostic indicators?	Low risk	No statistically significant differences on prognostic indicators at baseline between groups.
Free of other bias ‐ was the timing of the outcome assessment similar in all groups?	Low risk	No other concerns.