Comparison of the interface pressure and stiffness of four types of compression systems.

OBJECTIVE: To compare interface pressure (IP) and static stiffness index (SSI) of four different compression systems currently in use for the treatment of patients with venous leg ulcer. METHOD: Fifty-two ambulatory adults with healthy legs were recruited at random at a study centre after they had consented. The evaluated systems were: short-stretch system (SSB), Rosidal sys (Lohmann & Rauscher), multilayer bandaging (LSB) Profore (Smith & Nephew), Vari-stretch (VSB) ProGuide (Smith & Nephew) and tubular compression (CS) Rosidal Mobil (Lohmann & Rauscher). Interface pressure was measured using Kikuhime (Harada Corp.), placing a 3 cm-diameter probe at the B1 point. IP recording took place in the supine and standing positions, while sitting and during walking, on application of the compression systems and every 15 minutes thereafter for 4 hours. RESULTS: The IPs of SSB, LSB and VSB, measured immediately after bandage application, were significantly higher than that of CS (all p < 0.05). During the 4-hour study period, the IP for both VSB and LSB measured in the supine position initially increased to > 60 mmHg. Their overall mean IPs in the supine position were 48.96 ± 3.99 mmHg and 48.12 ± 4.57 mmHg, respectively. SSB and CS demonstrated more tolerable IP levels in this position of < 40 mmHg, which was similar to those when sitting. All systems maintained at least 40 mmHg in walking. SSB had a high SSI of 20 throughout the study. LSB followed with an SSI of 18 at the start, which reduced to 13, while the SSI for VSB decreased from 17 to 12 and CS, with an SSI of 6, lagged behind. CONCLUSION: These results may contribute to the understanding of IP and SSI of the four different compression systems evaluated. The IP and SSI data presented give clinicians an indication of the appropriate frequency of re-application of compression, and preliminary data on choosing a safe and effective compression treatment for their patients. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: The investigators received an educational grant from Lohmann & Rauscher GmbH & Co KG for this study.

Randomized controlled trial comparing treatment outcome of two compression bandaging systems and standard care without compression in patients with venous leg ulcers.

BACKGROUND: In Hong Kong, at the time of the study, compression treatment was not considered usual care for venous leg ulcer patients. AIM: This randomized controlled trial compared quality of life (QOL) aspects in venous leg ulcer patients of over 55-years of age, of short-stretch compression (SSB), four-layer compression bandaging (4LB) and usual care (UC) (moist wound healing dressing, no compression). METHOD: Study period was 24-weeks, the primary outcome was the patient functional status, disease-specific and generic health-related QOL measures and ulcer healing rates, comparing week 1 vs. week 24 (end) results. Assessments included photogrammetry, Brief Pain Inventory, SF-12 Health Survey, Charing Cross Venous Ulcer Questionnaire and Frenchay Activity Index. Data analysis was performed using, where appropriate; Kaplan Meier and log rank chi-square and the repeated measures analysis of variance test. RESULTS: A total of 321 patients participated in the study, 45 (14%) withdrew for various reasons. Compression bandaging in both groups significantly reduced pain (P < 0.0001) and improved functional status and QOL. Healing rate at 24 weeks for both compression groups was significant (P < 0.001); for SSB this was 72.0% (77/107) vs. 67.3% in the 4LB group (72/107) and 29.0% (31/107) with usual care. The reduction in ulcer area from weeks 12 to 24 was significant only for SSB (P < 0.047). CONCLUSION: Compression was shown to be feasible for elderly community care patients in Hong Kong and is currently implemented as part of standard venous leg ulcer treatment.