OTOtherJournal of physical therapy science2017

Comparing the interface pressure redistribution of three different types of cushions: differences according to age groups and cushion preferences.

Ji-Su Park, Sang-Heon Lee

PMID 28210039

WHAT IT FOUND

Across 211 adults who could sit independently and had no neurological disease, honeycomb was the most preferred cushion at 42.4%.

Cushion pressure varied by age and gender, but pressure ulcers were not measured.

Key findings

01Honeycomb was the most preferred cushion overall, selected first by 42.4% of participants.

02Men in their 20s had significantly higher mean total pressure in all sitting positions.

03Older men and older women both selected honeycomb as their most preferred cushion, at 55.1% and 50.0%.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The participants were adults who could sit independently and had no neurological disease, so the results do not apply to people at high risk for pressure ulcers. The study measured interface pressure for 90 seconds after 5 minutes of sitting, not long-term sitting or pressure ulcer outcomes. The cushions were tested in a fixed order, and participants were not randomised, so order effects cannot be ruled out. Pressure values were surrogate measures; lower pressure does not prove ulcer prevention. Preference was a single subjective choice, and the paper does not explain why honeycomb was preferred despite memory foam having lower mean pressure values. The authors state that interpreting cushion preference using only pressure has limitations and that future studies should use BMI and weight more carefully.

The easy way to misread this

Do not read the lower pressure values as proof that memory foam prevents pressure ulcers. The study measured short sitting pressure in adults who could sit independently and had no neurological disease, not people at risk for ulcers, and it did not track ulcer development.

Read it on PubMed →