Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 17 de 17
Filter
4.
Lancet ; 355(9206): 844, 2000 Mar 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-10711950
8.
J Wound Care ; 7(5): 227-30, 1998 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-9677988

ABSTRACT

This study evaluates 53 overlays (six types of alternating pressure overlays) which were purchased, placed into the hospital pool and examined for mechanical malfunction and mismanagement every working day (excluding 22 days' annual leave) for one year. Reasons for malfunction were recorded and categorised. Results show that 69 mechanical failures and seven cases of physical damage were recorded. There were significant differences between the different types of overlay in performance and the length of time to effect repairs. There were 56 errors in management (mainly units not plugged in or not switched on) and five cases of design features contributing to mismanagement. Although some alternating pressure overlays perform better than others, mechanical unreliability remains a problem for most.


Subject(s)
Beds/standards , Pressure Ulcer/prevention & control , Beds/supply & distribution , Equipment Design , Equipment Failure , Evaluation Studies as Topic , Humans , Pressure Ulcer/etiology , Risk Factors , Time Factors
9.
J Wound Care ; 7(3): 118, 1998 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-9601322
14.
J Wound Care ; 7(3): 118, 1998 Mar 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27957896

ABSTRACT

ULTRASOUND THERAPY AND WOUND HEALING NUTRITION AND PRESSURE DAMAGE.

15.
J Wound Care ; 5(3): 116-21, 1996 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-8826270

ABSTRACT

Intensive care wards have a high incidence of pressure sores. This trial, in an eight-bed unit, aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of constant-low-pressure and alternating-pressure support systems for preventing pressure sores. Patients without sores with a Norton risk score of < 13 were allocated to either alternating- or constant-low-pressure supports according to their hospital number. The cheapest supports were used initially, and changed for more sophisticated types if the patient's pressure areas deteriorated. None of the 23 patients using low-cost alternating-pressure supports developed open sores and only one had to be transferred to a more sophisticated mattress because of persistent erythema. Eleven out of 20 patients on constant-low-pressure mattresses or overlays developed either persistent erythema (three) or sores (eight). Ten were transferred to more expensive support systems. The mean cost of supports per patient in the alternating-pressure group was 44.50 pounds and in the constant-low-pressure group 86.20 pounds.


Subject(s)
Beds , Critical Care , Pressure Ulcer/prevention & control , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Beds/economics , Beds/standards , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Risk Factors
17.
J Wound Care ; 3(1): 5, 1994 Jan 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27922425

ABSTRACT

THE DIFFICULTY OF SECURING RESEARCH FUNDING POSTNATAL CARE THE DANGERS OF WATER-FILLED GLOVES.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...