How Are Support Surfaces Used in Pressure Ulcer Care Within Nursing Home Settings Assessed? A Scoping Review
Abstract
The aim of this research was to synthesise evaluative research on support surfaces in pressure ulcer care in nursing homes, by examining how studies address effectiveness, efficiency, user satisfaction and context of use. Following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and PRISMA-ScR guidelines, six databases were used. Studies assessing support surfaces in nursing homes were included. Data extraction covered studies' characteristics, support surfaces evaluated and methodologies employed. Among the 68 included studies, 40 focused primarily on support surface evaluation, mainly assessing effectiveness or efficiency (n = 31, 78%) rather than context of use (n = 5, 12%) or user satisfaction (n = 4, 10%). Residents' perspectives were captured in 42.5% (n = 17) of studies and quality of life in 25% (n = 10), with one qualitative study identified. Mattresses predominated among the 188 support surfaces evaluated (47%, n = 88). Studies were concentrated among seven research teams (49%, n = 33), and industry funding was the most common source overall (37%, n = 25). Current research prioritises effectiveness and efficiency assessment over holistic usability assessment. The limited incorporation of residents' and professionals' experiences and quality of life outcomes reveals a gap between biomedical approaches and person-centred perspectives. Future research should place residents' and professionals' experiences at the centre of support surface evaluation to generate clinically relevant and ethically grounded evidence.
Related
- Noninvasive left ventricular end-diastolic pressure assessment using a novel workflow and device in primary care settings to enhance heart failure diagnosis
- Isolation and characterization of midgut microbiota in Anopheles mosquitoes from areas under varying insecticide pressure and malaria transmission settings of Ethiopia
- Mishel’s Theory of Uncertainty in Illness in Support of Clinical Reasoning and Nursing Care Practices
- Symptom clusters and help-seeking behaviours during neutropenia after autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A qualitative study to inform oncology nursing support
- Frailty index and risk of pressure injuries in nursing home residents: results from the KASEHPAD cohort
BibTeX
@article{enez2026support,
title = {{How Are Support Surfaces Used in Pressure Ulcer Care Within Nursing Home Settings Assessed? A Scoping Review}},
author = {Jérémy Enez and Marielle André and Romain Pichon and Dominique Somme and Karim Jamal},
journal = {International Wound Journal},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.1111/iwj.71044},
url = {https://ehesp.hal.science/hal-05774391v1},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - How Are Support Surfaces Used in Pressure Ulcer Care Within Nursing Home Settings Assessed? A Scoping Review
AU - Jérémy Enez
AU - Marielle André
AU - Romain Pichon
AU - Dominique Somme
AU - Karim Jamal
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/26
JO - International Wound Journal
DO - 10.1111/iwj.71044
UR - https://ehesp.hal.science/hal-05774391v1
AB - The aim of this research was to synthesise evaluative research on support surfaces in pressure ulcer care in nursing homes, by examining how studies address effectiveness, efficiency, user satisfaction and context of use. Following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and PRISMA-ScR guidelines, six databases were used. Studies assessing support surfaces in nursing homes were included. Data extraction covered studies' characteristics, support surfaces evaluated and methodologies employed. Among the 68 included studies, 40 focused primarily on support surface evaluation, mainly assessing effectiveness or efficiency (n = 31, 78%) rather than context of use (n = 5, 12%) or user satisfaction (n = 4, 10%). Residents' perspectives were captured in 42.5% (n = 17) of studies and quality of life in 25% (n = 10), with one qualitative study identified. Mattresses predominated among the 188 support surfaces evaluated (47%, n = 88). Studies were concentrated among seven research teams (49%, n = 33), and industry funding was the most common source overall (37%, n = 25). Current research prioritises effectiveness and efficiency assessment over holistic usability assessment. The limited incorporation of residents' and professionals' experiences and quality of life outcomes reveals a gap between biomedical approaches and person-centred perspectives. Future research should place residents' and professionals' experiences at the centre of support surface evaluation to generate clinically relevant and ethically grounded evidence.
SN - 1742-4801
SN - 1742-481X
ER -