This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Gregg A. Pane, MD, MPA; Gail Chevalier, RN
Paramax Sytems Corporation/Louisiana Medicaid Baton Rouge

JAMA. 1993;269(21):2735.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—Ferrell et al¹ are to be congratulated for a well-designed study that has added to the body of literature concerning the treatment of pressure ulcers. In developing a clinical practice guideline on pressure ulcers in adults,² the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research reviewed 13 clinical studies examining the effects of pressure-reducing devices on the incidence of pressure ulcers, only three of which were randomized controlled trials. They concluded that although there is evidence pressure-reducing devices can decrease the incidence of pressure ulcers, there is no evidence to suggest that one type of device is more effective than another.

One problem with the present study is that it compares newer, high-cost, low-air-loss bed technology with a basic foam mattress. Other available devices include gel-foam mattresses, full-gel mattresses, and alternating air support mattresses. There are also important roles for aggressive risk assessment, education, and skin . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?