RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: At Odense University Hospital (OUH) alternating-air mattresses (AAM) are used in the prevention of pressure ulcers (PU); however, static overlays might be more effective and have lower costs. To investigate the properties and consequences of using static overlays for prevention of PU at OUH, a hospital-based health technology assessment (HTA) was conducted. METHODS: Two types of static overlays were tested in an observational study and compared with AAM for patients with a medium-high risk of PU in geriatric and orthopaedic wards at OUH. Incidence of PU was investigated 7 months before (n=720) and 6 months after implementation (n=837). Staff attitudes were examined in a questionnaire survey (n=55) and focus group interviews (n=13). Patients who had tried one of the overlays and the AAM were interviewed (n=12). RESULTS: No statistical difference in PU incidence was found before and after the implementation of overlays (2.5% before, 2.7% after, P=0.874, n=1557) and no patients lying on overlays developed PU (n=123). Staff had mixed attitudes, but the majority preferred having overlays as an option for their patients. Interviewed patients preferred overlays due to less noise and improved mobility. CONCLUSION: Both types of overlay are effective in PU prevention. However, overlays introduce challenges for staff and clear guidelines for the selection of support surfaces are needed. Overall, it is recommended that static overlays are considered as an alternative to AAM for PU prevention.
