Sub bandage pressure measurements and usability between three compression bandage systems

Objective: To test the reproducibility of the pressure of 3 venous ulcer compression systems: a four-layer bandage system*, a cohesive short stretch two-layer bandage system (SSB)** and an innovative two-layer Dual Compression System (DCS)*** which uses an bandage extension indicator system to help ensure correct pressure.  The bandage is indicated to provide therapeutic pressure when the subject is ambulatory or non ambulatory, which is a unique concept in compression.

Patients and Methods: Thirty-two nurses with experience in compression bandage systems applied all three systems to a female healthy volunteer: the sub-bandage pressures achieved (using a pressure monitor, placed at point B1) and the time of application were measured. Then the nurses were asked individually their thoughts regarding the DCS.

Results: The pressure measurements show that the majority of the nurses achieved a pressure between 30-50mmHg, with the DCS, whereas more personnel achieved very high pressure with the 4LB (25% achieving pressures higher than 50mmHg) and the majority did not achieve 30mmHg when using the SSB.  The nurses felt that the DCS offered advantages in terms of consistency of pressure due to the Pressure system. Regarding time of application, the SSB was the quickest (mean time:1min 50 s), and the 4LB the slowest (mean time of 3min 46s). For the DCS, the time was between 2min 16s and 2min 35s, considering the nurses were unfamiliar with this new product.

Conclusion: These results suggest that the DCS offers the required therapeutic pressures reliably due to the printed extension indicator system, whilst also offering less bulk, thus promoting patient concordance. This DCS therefore represents a suitable alternative to other compression bandage systems.

Trademarked Items (if applicable): * Profore
** Coban 2
*** UrgoK2

References (if applicable): 1. Hanna R, Bohbot S, Connolly N. A comparison of
interface pressures of three compression bandage
systems. Br J Nurs 2008; 17(20): 16-24.

2. Benigni JP, Lazareth I, Parpex P, et al. Efficacy, safety and
acceptability of a new two-layer bandage system for
venous leg ulcers. J Wound Care 2007; 16(9): 385-90.

3. Jünger M, Ladwig A, Bohbot S, Haase H. Comparison
of interface pressures of three compression bandaging
systems used on healthy volunteers. J Wound Care 2009;
18(11): 474-80.

4. Lazareth L, Moffatt C, Dissemond J, et al. Efficacy of two
compression systems in the management of VLUs: results
of a European RCT. J Wound Care 2012; 21(11): 553-65.