Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2006 Jun 17;332(7555):1416.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.38850.711435.7C. Epub 2006 Jun 1.

Pressure relieving support surfaces (PRESSURE) trial: cost effectiveness analysis

Cynthia Iglesias  1 , Jane Nixon, Gillian Cranny, E Andrea Nelson, Kim Hawkins, Angela Phillips, David Torgerson, Su Mason, Nicky Cullum; PRESSURE Trial Group
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Pressure relieving support surfaces (PRESSURE) trial: cost effectiveness analysis

Cynthia Iglesias et al. BMJ. .

Erratum in

  • BMJ. 2006 Aug 12;333(7563):339

Abstract

Objective: To assess the cost effectiveness of alternating pressure mattresses compared with alternating pressure overlays for the prevention of pressure ulcers in patients admitted to hospital.

Design: Cost effectiveness analysis carried out alongside the pressure relieving support surfaces (PRESSURE) trial; a multicentre UK based pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

Setting: 11 hospitals in six UK NHS trusts.

Participants: Intention to treat population comprising 1971 participants.

Main outcome measures: Kaplan Meier estimates of restricted mean time to development of pressure ulcers and total costs for treatment in hospital.

Results: Alternating pressure mattresses were associated with lower overall costs (283.6 pounds sterling per patient on average, 95% confidence interval--377.59 pounds sterling to 976.79 pounds sterling) mainly due to reduced length of stay in hospital, and greater benefits (a delay in time to ulceration of 10.64 days on average,--24.40 to 3.09). The differences in health benefits and total costs for hospital stay between alternating pressure mattresses and alternating pressure overlays were not statistically significant; however, a cost effectiveness acceptability curve indicated that on average alternating pressure mattresses compared with alternating pressure overlays were associated with an 80% probability of being cost saving.

Conclusion: Alternating pressure mattresses for the prevention of pressure ulcers are more likely to be cost effective and are more acceptable to patients than alternating pressure overlays.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
Incremental cost effectiveness plane of using alternating pressure overlays or alternating pressure mattresses for the prevention of pressure ulcers in patients admitted to hospital
Fig 2
Fig 2
Cost effectiveness acceptability curve for alternating pressure mattresses
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Reed RL, Hepburn K, Adelson R, Center B, McKnight P. Low serum albumin levels, confusion, and fecal incontinence: are these risk factors for pressure ulcers in mobility-impaired hospitalized adults? Gerontology 2003;49: 255-9. - PubMed
    1. Allman RM, Goode PS, Patrick MM, Burst N, Bartolucci AA. Pressure ulcer risk factors among hospitalized patients with activity limitation. JAMA 1995;273: 865-70. - PubMed
    1. Bennett G, Dealey C, Posnett J. The cost of pressure ulcers in the UK. Age Ageing 2004;33: 230-5. - PubMed
    1. Brandeis GH, Berlowitz DR, Katz P. Are pressure ulcers preventable? A survey of experts. Adv Skin Wound Care 2001;14: 244, 245-4, 248. - PubMed
    1. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Pressure ulcer prevention: pressure ulcer risk assessment and prevention, including the use of pressure-relieving devices (beds, mattresses and overlays) for the prevention of pressure ulcers in primary and secondary care. NICE clinical guideline. 2003; 7.

Publication types

Associated data