2021
DOI: 10.1097/01.asw.0000790472.80706.62
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Overcoming the Challenge of Support Surface Selection: Utilization of Standards

Abstract: Selecting the appropriate support surface for patients continues to challenge clinicians and facilities. The Support Surface Standards Committee has developed and published test methods that allow for informed comparisons among support surface characteristics. The first published standards address the performance characteristics of immersion/envelopment, shear/friction, and microclimate management. This article describes the full body support surface standards development and provides guidance on the use of th… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 2 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In 2001, the National Pressure Injury Panel took the lead and established a Support Surface Standards Initiative Subcommittee. While much work remains to be done, today we have standardized terminology and validated test methods that were adopted by the American National Standards Institute and Rehabilitation Engineering & Assistive Technology Society of North America (RESNA) 5. In other words, clinicians can decide which surface to use based on performance characteristics instead of features.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In 2001, the National Pressure Injury Panel took the lead and established a Support Surface Standards Initiative Subcommittee. While much work remains to be done, today we have standardized terminology and validated test methods that were adopted by the American National Standards Institute and Rehabilitation Engineering & Assistive Technology Society of North America (RESNA) 5. In other words, clinicians can decide which surface to use based on performance characteristics instead of features.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%