Structured Abstract

Contents

• Preface
• Acknowledgments
• Key Informants
• Technical Expert Panel
• Peer Reviewers
• Executive Summary
• Introduction
  • Background
  • Scope and Key Questions
• Methods
  • Topic Refinement and Review Protocol
  • Search Strategy
  • Study Selection
  • Data Extraction
  • Quality Assessment of Individual Studies
  • Data Synthesis
  • Strength of the Body of Evidence
  • Applicability
  • Peer Review
• Results
  • Overview
  • Overall Effectiveness of Pressure Ulcer Treatment
  • Results of Pressure Ulcer Treatment by Treatment Strategy
• Discussion
  • Key Findings and Strength of Evidence
  • Findings in Relationship to What Is Already Known
  • Applicability
  • Implications for Clinical and Policy Decisionmaking
  • Limitations of the Comparative Effectiveness Review Process
  • Limitations of the Evidence Base
  • Research Gaps
  • Conclusions
• References
• Abbreviations and Acronyms
• Appendix A Exact Search Strategy
• Appendix B Inclusion Criteria by PICOTS and Key Question
• Appendix C Stages of Pressure Ulcers
• Appendix D Included Studies List
• Appendix E Excluded Studies List
• Appendix F Quality Assessment Methods
• Appendix G Overall Strength of Evidence
• Appendix H Evidence Tables and Overall Quality Ratings

Prepared for: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services¹, Contract No. 290-2007-10057-I, Prepared by: Oregon Evidence-based Practice Center, Portland, OR

Suggested citation:

Saha S, Smith MEB, Totten A, Fu R, Wasson N, Rahman B, Motu’apuaka M, Hickam DH. Pressure Ulcer Treatment Strategies: Comparative Effectiveness. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 90. (Prepared by the Oregon Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2007-10057-I.) AHRQ Publication No. 13-EHC003-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; May 2013. www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/reports/final.cfm.

This report is based on research conducted by the Oregon Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), Rockville, MD (Contract No. 290-2007-10057-I). The findings and conclusions in this document are those of the authors, who are responsible for its contents; the findings and conclusions do not necessarily represent the views of AHRQ. Therefore, no statement in this report should be construed as an official position of AHRQ or of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

The information in this report is intended to help health care decisionmakers—patients and clinicians, health system leaders, and policymakers, among others—make well-informed decisions and thereby improve the quality of health care services. This report is not intended to be a substitute for the application of clinical judgment. Anyone who makes decisions concerning the provision of clinical care should consider this report in the same way as any medical reference and in conjunction with all other pertinent information, i.e., in the context of available resources and circumstances presented by individual patients.

This report may be used, in whole or in part, as the basis for development of clinical practice guidelines and other quality enhancement tools, or as a basis for reimbursement and coverage policies. AHRQ or U.S. Department of Health and Human Services endorsement of such derivative products may not be stated or implied.

None of the investigators have any affiliations or financial involvement that conflicts with the material presented in this report.

1

540 Gaither Road, Rockville, MD 20850; www​.ahrq.gov