1: J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs. 2005 Mar-Apr;32(2):112-20.
Related Articles, Links

Research comparing three heel ulcer-prevention devices.

Gilcreast DM, Warren JB, Yoder LH, Clark JJ, Wilson JA, Mays MZ.

University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, USA. gilcreast@uthscsa.edu

OBJECTIVE: To compare 3 pressure-reduction devices for effectiveness in prevention of heel ulcers in moderate-risk to high-risk patients. DESIGN: A prospective quasi-experimental 3-group design was used. SETTING AND SUBJECTS: A sample of 338 "moderate-risk to high-risk" adult inpatients, ages 18 to 97, at 2 medical centers in South Texas were studied. INSTRUMENTS: The Braden Scale for Pressure Ulcer Risk and investigator-developed history and skin assessment tools were used. METHODS: Subjects were randomly assigned to the High-Cushion Kodel Heel Protector (bunny boot), Egg Crate Heel Lift Positioner (egg crate), or EHOB Foot Waffle Air Cushion (foot waffle). Data are demographics, Braden scores, comorbidities, skin assessments, lengths of stay, and costs of devices. Analyses were Chi-square, analysis of variance, and regression. RESULTS: Of 240 subjects with complete data, 77 (32%) were assigned to the bunny boot group, 87 (36.3%) to the egg crate, and 76 (31.7%) to the foot waffle. Twelve ulcers developed in 240 subjects (5% incidence). Six subjects had only 1 foot. Eleven ulcers were Stage I (nonblanchable erythema), and 1 was Stage II (partial thickness). Overall incidence was 3.9% for the bunny boot, 4.6% for the egg crate, and 6.6% for the foot waffle (not significantly different among groups). The bunny boot with pillows was most cost effective (F[3], N = 240) = 1.342, p <or= .001). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the bunny boot was as effective as higher-tech devices. The results, however, were confounded by nurses adding pillows to the bunny boot group.

Publication Types:
PMID: 15867701 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]