Purpose/Objective: Compare the effectiveness of alternating air support surfaces with air fluidized therapy in the care of post-operative flap patients.

Pressure ulcers are a common and recurring problem, with some members of the population at an increased risk of developing full thickness tissue loss with involvement of deep structures including bone. Such patients often require reconstructive surgery. While there are many effective strategies for the prevention and treatment of primary pressure ulcers, including the use of a pressure redistribution support surface either active (alternating system) or reactive (air fluidized bed), there is a scarcity of quality research evidence to indicate which option provides positive outcomes and is the most cost-effective in the protection of skin integrity following reconstructive surgery.

Methodology:

Ten postoperative patients who have undergone reconstructive surgery to repair a tissue deficit in the sacral-coccygeal, trochanteric or ischial region were randomly assigned (IRB approval and consents were obtained) to either an alternating air pressure support surface or an air fluidized support surface. The results of ten patients: five on each category of support surface will be reported. Outcomes studied include the integrity of the surgical site, tissue integrity at other vulnerable anatomical locations, patient and clinician acceptability, and cost-effectiveness.

Statistics:

Results obtained for ten patients will be described, without formal statistical analysis in this early phase of a larger study.

Results:

Positive clinical outcomes were achieved for patients on both categories of support surfaces.

Conclusion:

An alternating pressure air mattress may provide an efficacious and cost-effective alternative to the use of air fluidized therapy in this patient population.

This study has been funded in part by a research grant from Huntleigh Healthcare, L.L.C.