A Comparative Feasibility Study of Body Interface Pressure between Hybrid and Conventional Support Surfaces

Pressure injuries remain a significant healthcare concern due to their impact on patient outcomes and treatment costs. While advanced powered support surfaces may improve pressure redistribution and microclimate control, their cost and energy dependence can limit widespread implementation. This study evaluated two hybrid textile support surfaces (Spacer+W1 and Spacer+W2) and compared their body–interface pressure performance with conventional surfaces, including foam and standard hospital mattresses, gel pads, fluidized surfaces, and air mattresses. Both hybrid surfaces demonstrated lower interface pressure index values than foam and standard mattresses under the tested conditions, indicating improved pressure redistribution. Spacer+W1 and Spacer+W2 showed comparable performance, suggesting minimal influence of pile configuration on pressure outcomes. The double-layer spacer textile design may support heat and moisture dissipation, and the cotton top layer provides a skin-friendly contact surface. Although certain powered air systems exhibited lower pressure values, the hybrid surfaces demonstrated favorable overall performance among passive systems evaluated. These findings suggest that hybrid textile support surfaces may represent a promising passive option for pressure management. Further clinical studies are required to confirm long-term effectiveness in diverse patient populations.