assessment of support surfaces (static & mixed) for neonates
DESCRIPTION
ASSESSMENT OF SUPPORT SURFACES (STATIC & MIXED) FOR NEONATES. FP-50002 EWMA/GNEAUPP 2014. M. M. Sánchez-Lorente 1 ; P. García-Molina 2-3 ; C. Vergara-Hernández 2 ; E. Sanchis-Sánchez 2 ; J. Martos-Torres 2 ; A. Álvarez-Ordiales 4 ; & E. Balaguer-López 2-3. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
ASSESSMENT OF SUPPORT SURFACES (STATIC & MIXED)
FOR NEONATESM. M. Sánchez-Lorente1; P. García-Molina2-3; C. Vergara-Hernández2;
E. Sanchis-Sánchez2; J. Martos-Torres2; A. Álvarez-Ordiales4; & E. Balaguer-López2-3
FP-5
0002
EW
MA/
GNEA
UPP
201
4
1. Conselleria de Sanitat, Valencia (SPA).
2. University of Valencia, Valencia (SPA).
3. Hospital Clínico Universitario, Valencia (SPA).
4. Hospital Universitari i Politècnic “La Fe”, Valencia (SPA).
Presenting author: Mr. Pablo García-Molina
Background
FP-5
0002
EW
MA/
GNEA
UPP
201
4
Existence of several neonatal support surfaces
Lack of evaluation
Interface pressure & pressure redistribution Efficacy in the prevention or treatment of PU
however…
regarding…
Aim
FP-5
0002
EW
MA/
GNEA
UPP
201
4
• To assess the interface pressure and pressure redistribution of five devices of constant low pressure (static and mixed support surfaces).
152
43
Methods
FP-5
0002
EW
MA/
GNEA
UPP
201
4
Study design• Laboratory study with repeated measures design.
Sample• Eight neonatal simulation dummies with different characteristics
regarding head circumference, weight and height.
Methods
FP-5
0002
EW
MA/
GNEA
UPP
201
4
Support devicesVisc-T Visc-White Visc-Gray Visc-Blue Pol-3D
Structure Viscoelastic“T” units
ViscoelasticBlock
ViscoelasticBlock
ViscoelasticBlock
Polyester filaments
Layers 1 2 2 2 1
Density (Kg/m3) 50 50/50 50/50 40 NA
Hardness (Kpa) 1.6 1.01/5 1.01/3.6 2.5 NA
Compression factor 2 2/2 2/2 - NA
Methods
FP-5
0002
EW
MA/
GNEA
UPP
201
4
Variables• Mean pressure (mmHg).• Maximum pressure (mmHg).• Mean pressure in head region (mmHg).• Area of contact (cm2).
Equipment• XSENSOR X3 PX100:40.40.002 device.
Procedure• See: E-poster no. 50006.
Methods
FP-5
0002
EW
MA/
GNEA
UPP
201
4
Statistical analysis• Descriptive statistics.
• Due to a small sample size, a non-parametric test (Friedman test) was carried out to assess differences among groups. If a significant difference was found, post hoc comparisons among groups were performed using the Wilcoxon-Nemenyi-McDonald-Thompson test.
• The analysis was carried out by means of the R environment (The R Foundation for Statistical Computing).
• Data set and code employed for the analysis can be found at www.figshare.com (*).*http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.977866
Results
FP-5
0002
EW
MA/
GNEA
UPP
201
4
Visc-T Visc-White Visc-Gray Visc-Blue Pol-3D
Mean pres., x̅ (SD) 16.26 (2.77) 17.51 (3.32) 18.12 (3.32) 17.11 (3.07) 17.82 (2.58)
Max. pres., x̅ (SD) 24.58 (7.39) 26.79 (8.88) 28.15 (7.91) 25.49 (7.55) 27.53 (6.12)
Head pres., x̅ (SD) 17.25 (3.37) 18.58 (4.17) 19.53 (4.45) 17.95 (3.71) 18.7 (2.92)
Area, x̅ (SD) 19.29 (11.29) 22.11 (12.13) 22 (9.75) 23.52 (13.21) 29.23 (12.46)
Lowest values!
Highest values!
Results
FP-5
0002
EW
MA/
GNEA
UPP
201
4
Friedman test χ2 Df P-value
Mean pres., x̅ (SD) 14,3 4 0,006
Max. pres., x̅ (SD) 11,2 4 0,02
Head pres., x̅ (SD) 8,7 4 0,07
Area, x̅ (SD) 18,51 4 < 0,001
Results
FP-5
0002
EW
MA/
GNEA
UPP
201
4
Row-Column Visc-T Visc-White Visc-Gray Visc-Blue Pol-3D
Visc-T - - - - -
Visc-White 0,24 - - - -
Visc-Gray 0,005 0,61 - - -
Visc-Blue 0,71 0,93 0,17 - -
Pol-3D 0,056 0,97 0,93 0,61 -
Post hoc analysis: mean pressure (p-value)
Results
Results
FP-5
0002
EW
MA/
GNEA
UPP
201
4
Row-Column Visc-T Visc-White Visc-Gray Visc-Blue Pol-3D
Visc-T - - - - -
Visc-White 0,32 - - - -
Visc-Gray 0,014 0,71 - - -
Visc-Blue 0,88 0,88 0,17 - -
Pol-3D 0,32 1 0,71 0,88 -
Post hoc analysis: maximum pressure (p-value)
Results
Results
FP-5
0002
EW
MA/
GNEA
UPP
201
4
Row-Column Visc-T Visc-White Visc-Gray Visc-Blue Pol-3D
Visc-T - - - - -
Visc-White 0,71 - - - -
Visc-Gray 0,95 0,98 - - -
Visc-Blue 0,27 0,95 0,71 - -
Pol-3D < 0,001 0,053 0,01 0,27 -
Post hoc analysis: pressure area (p-value)
Results
Conclusion
The “T” device presents the best values of pressure relief.
The polyester fiber device presents the best values of pressure redistribution.
Adding an upper layer of polyester fiber to the “T” device could result in a better support surface.
Next step: studying the properties of the new support surface in healthy subjects under clinical conditions.