|
|
|
题名
|
作者
|
年代
|
出处
|
被引量
|
| 1 | 气垫床垫与气垫床罩预防压力性溃疡的随机、对照试验:PRESSURE(减压支持表面)试验显示文摘Objective: To compare whether differences exist between alternating pressure overlays and alternating pressure mattresses in the development of new pressure ulcers, healing of existing pressure ulcers, and patient acceptability. Design: Pragmatic, open, multicentre, randomized controlled trial. Setting: 11 hospitals in six NHS trusts. Participants: 1972 people admitted to hospital as acute or elective patients. Interventions: Participants were randomized to an alternating pressure mattress (n = 982) or an alternating pressure overlay (n = 990). Main outcome measures: The proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer of grade 2 or worse; time to development of new pressure ulcers; proportions of participants developing a new ulcer within 30 days; healing of existing pressure ulcers; and patient acceptability. Results: Intention to treat analysis found no difference in the proportions of participants developing a new pressure ulcer of grade 2 or worse (10.7%overlay patients, 10.3%mattress patients; difference 0.4%, 95%confidence interval -2.3%to 3.1%, P = 0.75). More overlay patients requested change owing to dissatisfaction (23.3%) than mattress patients (18.9%, P = 0.02). Conclusion: No difference was found between alternating pressure mattresses and alternating pressure overlays in the proportion of people who develop a pressure ulcer. | Nixon J. Cranny G. Iglesias C. N. Redd 朱国兴 | 2006 | 世界核心医学期刊文摘(皮肤病学分册)2006，，12： | 2 |
| 2 | Prevalence of viral respiratory tract infections in children with asthma显示文摘 | Nino Khetsuriani N. Neely Kazerouni Dean D. Erdman Xiaoyan Lu Stephen C. Redd Larry J. Anderson W. Gerald Teague | 2007 | The Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology2007，，2： | 1 |
| 3 | PRESSURE(减压支持表面)试验:成本效益分析显示文摘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 per patient on average, 95%confidence interval -￡377.59 to ￡976.79) 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. | Iglesias C. Nixon J. Cranny G. N. Redd Cullum 朱国兴 | 2006 | 世界核心医学期刊文摘(皮肤病学分册)2006，，12： | 0 |
您所在的机构暂未开通此部分的功能，请联系管理员