Patient or population outcome: individuals at risk to develop pressure ulcers

Settings: Acute healthcare setting, and Long healthcare setting

Comparison: Other topical intervention, direct intervention or standard care

Authors & year

Outcome measure/ Follow up/

Assessment tool

Illustrative comparative risks

Relative effect

CI 95%

Number of participants

Quality of evidence

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

Other /or standard intervention

Intervention

[12]

Non (inferiority study)

Incidence of pressure ulcer: olive oil vs Hyperoxygenated Fatty Acid.

Follow up: up to 16 weeks.

Assessment tool: Braden scale

HOFA: 394

Sacrum 8 (3.08)

Rt heel 5 (1.92)

Lt heel 3 (1.15)

Rt trochanter 4 (1.54)

Lt trochanter 1 (0.38)

Olive oil:437

Sacrum 8 (2.55)

Rt heel 4 (1.27)

Lt heel 3 (0.96)

Rt trochanter 0 (0)

Lt trochanter 1 (0.32)

R.R = 0.83 (0.42 - 1.64)

831

Low

Due to risk of imprecision.

No difference in the findings between intervention of olive oil and control group of HOFA group.

[8]

Incidence of pressure ulcer: silicon foam dressing vs fatty acids oil spry in addition to standard care.

Follow up:14 days

Assessment scale: Braden scale

Silicon foam dressing (n = 129)

3.9% (n = 5).

Standard care (n = 202)

5% (n = 10)

Fatty acid oil (n = 130)

5.4% (n = 7)

Not estimated

397

Low

Due to risk of imprecision.

Silicon foam dressing group showed lower incidence of pressure ulcer in comparison with Fatty acid oil group.

[13]

Incidence of pressure ulcer: new topical agent (PARZINE-4A-SKR) vs placebo.

Follow up: 14 days.

Assessment scale: Braden scale

Average on Braden scale: 12.65+ - 1.82 (median = 12, extremes = 8 - 15).

Average on Braden scale: 12.28+ - 1.80 (median = 12, extremes = 5 - 9).

R.R = 0.82 (0.29 - 2.36)

194

Low

Due to risk of imprecision.

No statistical significance of the intervention in comparison with the placebo.

[10]

Incidence of pressure ulcer: Aloe-Vera gel vs standard care.

Follow up: 10 days.

Assessment tool:

Braden scale.

40 participants

Frequency of PU = 8 (21.1%)

40 participants

Frequency of PU = 2 (5.1%)

Not estimated

80 participants

Low

Due to risk of bias and imprecision.

There was better outcomes in prevention pressure ulcer among intervention group (2/40 - 5.1%) in comparison with control group (8/40 - 21.1%).

[11]

Development of pressure ulcer during the period of the study.

Follow up: 6 months (after discharge).

Standard care: (n = 182)

Incidence rate per 1000 patient days: 5.9 (2.8 - 12.4)

Five layered soft silicon foam (n = 182)

Incidence rate per 1000 patient days:

0.7 (0.1 - 5.2)

Not estimated

184 participants

Low

Due to risk of bias and imprecision.

Silicon foam dressing had lower incidence of pressure ulcer in comparison with the standard dressing (0.7% vs 5.9%)