Recherche de publication

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.

OBJECTIVE

Postsurgery dressing changes in diabetic foot amputation wounds and surgical wounds healing by secondary intention are often conducted in the operating room under general anesthesia. A prospective comparative cohort study was performed in 60 patients (n = 60: n = 30/n = 30) with secondary-intention surgical wounds (82% had forefoot and/or digit[s] amputations) to compare 2 different dressing types.

METHOD

Patients at the study center gave informed written consent, after which they were randomly allocated to one of the treatment groups. Group A received a biocellulose dressing with polyhexanide, and group B a hydrophobic dressing with dialkyl-carbamoyl-chloride. In both groups, gauze was used as secondary dressing and fixed with a film dressing. One day after surgery, the dressings were removed by the surgeon and patient-reported pain and dressing adherence/integrity were evaluated. The number of patients that required general anesthesia was determined during the procedure and afterward.

RESULTS

All patients (n = 60; n = 30/n = 30) were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Pain levels in group A were significantly (t (59) = 4.026, P < .000) lower upon dressing removal, when compared with group B; in group A, n = 21 reported no pain versus n = 8 (26%) for group B. In group A, the dressing adhered in 7 subjects (23%) versus n = 27 (90%) of cases in group B (P = .000). No anesthesia was required for the patients in group A, contrary to group B, where 16% of patients received general anesthesia for dressing removal.

CONCLUSION

Pain levels were significantly lower and the dressing adhered significantly less in group A, compared with group B, demonstrating a better quality of life for the patients in group A.