Summary of findings 6. Reactive gel surfaces compared with reactive air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers.
| Reactive gel surfaces compared with reactive air surfaces for preventing pressure ulcers | ||||||
| Patient or population: preventing pressure ulcers Setting: nursing home Intervention: reactive gel surfaces Comparison: reactive air surfaces | ||||||
| Outcomes | Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | № of participants (studies) | Certainty of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Risk with reactive air surfaces | Risk with reactive gel surfaces | |||||
| Proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer Follow‐up: 6 months | Study population | RR 0.80 (0.36 to 1.77) | 66 (1 RCT) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ Very lowa,b | It is uncertain if there is a difference in the proportion of participants developing a new ulcer between reactive gel surfaces and reactive air surfaces. | |
| 303 per 1,000 | 242 per 1,000 (109 to 536) | |||||
| Time to pressure ulcer incidence | The included study did not report this outcome. | |||||
| Support surface‐associated patient comfort | The included study did not report this outcome. | |||||
| All reported adverse events | The included study did not report this outcome. | |||||
| Health‐related quality of life | The included study did not report this outcome. | |||||
| Cost effectiveness | The included study did not report this outcome. | |||||
| *The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High certainty: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect. Moderate certainty: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate; the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different. Low certainty: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited; the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect. Very low certainty: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate; the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect. | ||||||
aDowngraded once for unclear overall risk of bias. bDowngraded twice for imprecision because the OIS was not met and the very wide confidence interval crossed RRs = 0.75 and 1.25.