Mid-term effect of customized graduated elastic compression stockings for managing occupational edema: A randomized controlled trial.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Sheng-Xing Wang, Wen-Tao Yang, Zhen-Yi Jin, Jia-Hao Wen, Hua-Liang Ren, Ying Xiong, Xiao-Ming Tao, Chun-Min Li
{"title":"Mid-term effect of customized graduated elastic compression stockings for managing occupational edema: A randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Sheng-Xing Wang, Wen-Tao Yang, Zhen-Yi Jin, Jia-Hao Wen, Hua-Liang Ren, Ying Xiong, Xiao-Ming Tao, Chun-Min Li","doi":"10.1177/1358863X241290801","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This study compared the effectiveness of customized graduated elastic compression stockings (c-GECS) based on individual lower-leg parameter models with standard graduated elastic compression stockings (s-GECS) in patients with occupational edema (OE).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A single-blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted with 70 patients with OE, randomly assigned to the c-GECS or s-GECS group. Follow-up assessments were performed at 1 and 3 months. Primary outcomes comprised visual analog scale scores (1-10) for lower-limb symptoms and comfort level of GECS. Secondary outcomes included GECS usage duration, calf volume, and interface pressure at B and C points (B: minimal ankle circumference point; C: maximum calf circumference point).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both groups exhibited significant improvements in pain, heaviness, and swelling symptoms at the 1- and 3-month follow up. At the 3-month follow up, the c-GECS group showed significantly superior improvement in symptoms. Comfort assessment revealed that c-GECS (16.2 ± 2.9) provided significantly greater comfort than s-GECS (13.6 ± 3.2) (<i>p</i> < 0.001). However, the two groups showed no significant difference in GECS wear duration. At 3 months, the c-GECS group showed superior maintenance of stocking tension at point B (<i>p</i> = 0.018). Both types of GECS significantly reduced calf volume at both time points, with no notable difference between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>c-GECS effectively alleviated pain, heaviness, and swelling symptoms in patients with OE. Although c-GECS did not exhibit a clear advantage in reducing calf volume as compared to s-GECS, it provided more stable and enduring pressure, enhanced the overall fit of GECS, and improved comfort during wear. Chinese Clinical Trial Registry No. ChiCTR2100042894.</p>","PeriodicalId":23604,"journal":{"name":"Vascular Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1358863X241290801"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vascular Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1358863X241290801","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: This study compared the effectiveness of customized graduated elastic compression stockings (c-GECS) based on individual lower-leg parameter models with standard graduated elastic compression stockings (s-GECS) in patients with occupational edema (OE).

Methods: A single-blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted with 70 patients with OE, randomly assigned to the c-GECS or s-GECS group. Follow-up assessments were performed at 1 and 3 months. Primary outcomes comprised visual analog scale scores (1-10) for lower-limb symptoms and comfort level of GECS. Secondary outcomes included GECS usage duration, calf volume, and interface pressure at B and C points (B: minimal ankle circumference point; C: maximum calf circumference point).

Results: Both groups exhibited significant improvements in pain, heaviness, and swelling symptoms at the 1- and 3-month follow up. At the 3-month follow up, the c-GECS group showed significantly superior improvement in symptoms. Comfort assessment revealed that c-GECS (16.2 ± 2.9) provided significantly greater comfort than s-GECS (13.6 ± 3.2) (p < 0.001). However, the two groups showed no significant difference in GECS wear duration. At 3 months, the c-GECS group showed superior maintenance of stocking tension at point B (p = 0.018). Both types of GECS significantly reduced calf volume at both time points, with no notable difference between the groups.

Conclusion: c-GECS effectively alleviated pain, heaviness, and swelling symptoms in patients with OE. Although c-GECS did not exhibit a clear advantage in reducing calf volume as compared to s-GECS, it provided more stable and enduring pressure, enhanced the overall fit of GECS, and improved comfort during wear. Chinese Clinical Trial Registry No. ChiCTR2100042894.

定制渐进式弹力袜治疗职业性水肿的中期效果:随机对照试验
简介:本研究比较了基于个体小腿参数模型的定制渐进式弹力袜(c-GECS)与标准渐进式弹力袜(s-GECS)对职业性水肿(OE)患者的疗效:对 70 名职业性水肿患者进行了单盲随机对照试验,随机分配到 c-GECS 组或 s-GECS 组。分别在 1 个月和 3 个月后进行随访评估。主要结果包括下肢症状视觉模拟量表评分(1-10 分)和 GECS 舒适度。次要结果包括使用 GECS 的持续时间、小腿体积以及 B 点和 C 点的界面压力(B:最小踝周点;C:最大小腿周点):在 1 个月和 3 个月的随访中,两组患者的疼痛、沉重感和肿胀症状均有明显改善。在 3 个月的随访中,c-GECS 组在症状改善方面明显更胜一筹。舒适度评估显示,c-GECS(16.2 ± 2.9)的舒适度明显高于 s-GECS(13.6 ± 3.2)(p < 0.001)。不过,两组在 GECS 佩戴时间上没有明显差异。3 个月后,c-GECS 组在 B 点的袜子张力保持率更优(p = 0.018)。结论:c-GECS 能有效缓解 OE 患者的疼痛、沉重感和肿胀症状。结论:c-GECS 能有效缓解 OE 患者的疼痛、沉重感和肿胀症状。虽然与 s-GECS 相比,c-GECS 在减少小腿体积方面没有明显优势,但它能提供更稳定、更持久的压力,增强了 GECS 的整体贴合度,提高了佩戴舒适度。中国临床试验注册号:ChiCTR2100042894。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Vascular Medicine
Vascular Medicine 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
5.70%
发文量
158
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The premier, ISI-ranked journal of vascular medicine. Integrates the latest research in vascular biology with advancements for the practice of vascular medicine and vascular surgery. It features original research and reviews on vascular biology, epidemiology, diagnosis, medical treatment and interventions for vascular disease. A member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信