Influence of support surfaces on the distribution of body interface pressure in surgical positioning.

Karoline Faria De Oliveira,Cleudmar Amaral De Araújo,Ana Lúcia De-Mattia,Maria Helena Barbosa,Elizabeth Barichello,Cristina Maria Galvão,Patrícia Da Silva Pires

doi:10.1590/1518-8345.2692.3083

Abstract

Objective:to evaluate the interface pressure (IP) of support surfaces (SSs) on bony prominences. Method:a quasi-experimental study with repeated measures on each SS. Twenty healthy adult volunteers participated in the study. The participants were placed in the supine position on a standard operating table for evaluation of IP on the bony prominences of the occipital, subscapular, sacral, and calcaneal regions using sensors. Seven evaluations were performed for each bony prominence: one on a standard operating table, and the others on tables containing SSs made of viscoelastic polymer, soft foam, or sealed foam. Descriptive statistics and analysis of variance were used to analyze the data. Results:the mean IP was higher on the viscoelastic polymer-based SS compared to the other SSs (p<0.001). The mean IP was relatively lower on the density-33 sealed foam and density-18 soft foam. In addition, this variable was comparatively higher in the sacral region (42.90 mmHg) and the calcaneal region (15.35 mmHg). Conclusion:IP was relatively lower on foam-based SSs, especially on density-18 soft foam and density-33 sealed foam. Nonetheless, IP was not reduced on the viscoelastic polymer SS compared to the control SS.

Highlights

Support surfaces (SSs) are specialized devices, overlays, pads, and integrated systems that redistribute body pressure
The objective of this study is to evaluate the interface pressure (IP) of SS [viscoelastic polymer, sealed foams (28, 33, and 45 kg m3), and soft foams (18 and 28 kg m3)] on the bony prominences of the occipital, subscapular, sacral, and calcaneal regions
The mean peak IP was relatively higher on all bony prominences on the viscoelastic polymer SS compared to the other materials and the standard operating table (SOT) (Tables 1 and 2 and Figure 2)

Summary

Introduction

Support surfaces (SSs) are specialized devices, overlays, pads, and integrated systems that redistribute body pressure. These devices are designed to control pressure, shearing, and fabric friction while maintaining the microclimate or other therapeutic functions(1). The etiology of PU involves, among other factors, interface pressure (IP), characterized by compression of soft tissues between the bony prominences and the surfaces on which patients lie. Exposure to IP over prolonged periods decreases tissue perfusion and oxygenation of the skin and deeper layers. In view of this causal relationship, the present study used IP as a criterion for assessing PU risk(5-8)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion