Poster
LR-15
Comparison of two compression bandage systems, including a novel Dual Compression System, in a laboratory-based test under controlled conditions.
Introduction: Compression therapy is the standard of care for edema control and lower limb wound healing. The goal of compression therapy is to provide, sustained, therapeutic compression that effectively and comfortable reduces edema leading to better healing and compliance.
The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of two commercially available compression systems in a bench test by an independent laboratory under a controlled environment. A novel wrap (Dual Compression System, DCS*) and another traditional Two Layer Bandage (TLB*) compression systems were evaluated in this computer controlled tensile test.
Methods: Three samples of each layer were cut into 70 mm lengths, each sample was taken from a different bandage roll. Samples were clamped in a full wrap width tensile fixture on the computer-controlled test machine. Tensile force deflection curves were generated for each sample. The total work at maximum stretch was calculated from this data.
Results: The DCS* compression system showed more than two times greater work (foot pounds) at maximum tension. DCS* also showed higher force per unit deflection and greater total elongation through the loading cycle. It was found also that the both layers of the DCS* provide high work at maximum stretch as opposed to only one layer of the TLB system. This indicates the potential ability of the DCS* to offer wider range of performance when applied to the lower limb, especially after the limb volume is initially reduced by compression.
Conclusions: The high degree of compression provided by the two layers of DCS may have the potential clinical implication of providing better effective compression even after the initial limb reduction has occurred. Based on the results, the DCS* has the ability to provide effective compression consistently over a greater range of limb volume. The observed force/deflection curve explains why the DCS* provides therapeutic performance throughout its elastic deflection, which could potentially lead to improved wound healing as well as improving patient compliance through increased comfort.
Sponsor
Sponsor name
Urgo Medical
References
Partsch, H., & Mortimer, P. (2015). Compression for leg wounds. British Journal of Dermatology, 173(2), 359-369.
Chassagne, F., Martin, F., Badel, P., Convert, R., Giraux, P., & Molimard, J. (2015). Experimental investigation of pressure applied on the lower leg by elastic compression bandage. Annals of biomedical engineering, 43(12), 2967-2977.
Tamoue, F., & Ehrmann, A. (2018). First principle study: parametric investigation of the mechanics of elastic and inelastic textile materials for the determination of compression therapy efficacy. Textile Research Journal, 88(21), 2506-2515.
Hanna, R., Bohbot, S., & Connolly, N. (2008). A comparison of inferface pressures of three compression bandage systems. British Journal of Nursing, 17(Sup9), S16-S24.
Mosti, G. B., & Mattaliano, V. (2007). Simultaneous changes of leg circumference and interface pressure under different compression bandages. European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery, 33(4), 476-482.
Benigni, J. P., Lazareth, I., Parpex, P., Gerard, J. L., Alves, M., Vin, F., ... & Bohbot, S. (2007). Efficacy, safety and acceptability of a new two-layer bandage system for venous leg ulcers. Journal of wound care, 16(9), 385-390.
Jünger, M., Ladwig, A., Bohbot, S., & Haase, H. (2009). Comparison of interface pressures of three compression bandaging systems used on healthy. journal of wound care, 18(11), 474-480.
Lazareth, I., Moffatt, C., Dissemond, J., Padieu, A. L., Truchetet, F., Beissert, S., ... & Meaume, S. (2012). Efficacy of two compression systems in the management of VLUs: results of a European RCT. journal of wound care, 21(11), 553-565.
Product Information
Dual Compression System, DCS* = UrgoK2Traditional Two Layer Bandage, TLB* = Coban2
Trademark
UrgoK2, Coban2