Compression therapies for the treatment of venous leg ulcers: a mixed method process evaluation in a randomised controlled trial, VenUS6.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Trials Pub Date : 2026-07-02 DOI:10.1186/s13063-026-09854-6
Maartje Kletter, Jane Griffiths, Catherine Arundel, Jo Dumville
{"title":"Compression therapies for the treatment of venous leg ulcers: a mixed method process evaluation in a randomised controlled trial, VenUS6.","authors":"Maartje Kletter, Jane Griffiths, Catherine Arundel, Jo Dumville","doi":"10.1186/s13063-026-09854-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Strong compression treatment is an evidence-based first-line treatment that helps reduce the healing time of venous leg ulcers. VenUS 6 is a three-arm RCT conducted in the UK that aimed to compare 4-layer bandages and 2-layer hosiery with compression wraps and 2-layer bandages. The study found that compression wraps are unlikely to reduce time to venous leg ulcer healing compared to the other treatments evaluate, although there was some uncertainty with this estimate. We nested a mixed-methods process evaluation within VenUS 6 to gain a more in-depth understanding of trial participant and nursing staff views on and experiences of various compression therapies, and to consider how these insights may explain VenUS 6 outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted individual, in-depth interviews with 11 trial participants and focus group discussions with 19 relevant health professionals based at seven participating primary, secondary and community care NHS Trust sites. We also used data collected during the trial from patients about their experience of compression use. We conducted a separate UK-wide survey with nurses to learn more about availability of the trial compression treatment options in clinics and their views on the ease of use of the compression treatments in scope. Qualitative data were analysed using framework analysis and quantitative data were analysed descriptively. Data were integrated with the help of the Pillar Integration Process.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was high satisfaction with compression wraps and limited discomfort among trial participants, who appreciated the wraps could be adjusted and taken off to allow them to take showers. Staff mentioned, however, that trial participants were prone to loosen the wraps. Whilst 2-layer hosiery allowed for self-application and could be taken off, trial participants said the hosiery was very tight and difficult to apply. Bandages, on the other hand, whilst bulky and sometimes uncomfortable, would often not be removed by trial participants, leading to greater exposure to effective compression.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We have identified that people with venous ulcers wearing compression wraps are more likely to report loosening them and removal at night, than people wearing other types of compression treatment which was confirmed by staff. These reported behaviours could explain longer healing times for compression wraps, compared to other treatments delivered in our RCT. Despite longer times to healing, compression wraps may still be an appropriate compression treatment option for some people, and it is important for nursing staff to have conversations with service users and share decisions about suitable treatment options.</p>","PeriodicalId":23333,"journal":{"name":"Trials","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13595631/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-026-09854-6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Strong compression treatment is an evidence-based first-line treatment that helps reduce the healing time of venous leg ulcers. VenUS 6 is a three-arm RCT conducted in the UK that aimed to compare 4-layer bandages and 2-layer hosiery with compression wraps and 2-layer bandages. The study found that compression wraps are unlikely to reduce time to venous leg ulcer healing compared to the other treatments evaluate, although there was some uncertainty with this estimate. We nested a mixed-methods process evaluation within VenUS 6 to gain a more in-depth understanding of trial participant and nursing staff views on and experiences of various compression therapies, and to consider how these insights may explain VenUS 6 outcomes.

Methods: We conducted individual, in-depth interviews with 11 trial participants and focus group discussions with 19 relevant health professionals based at seven participating primary, secondary and community care NHS Trust sites. We also used data collected during the trial from patients about their experience of compression use. We conducted a separate UK-wide survey with nurses to learn more about availability of the trial compression treatment options in clinics and their views on the ease of use of the compression treatments in scope. Qualitative data were analysed using framework analysis and quantitative data were analysed descriptively. Data were integrated with the help of the Pillar Integration Process.

Results: There was high satisfaction with compression wraps and limited discomfort among trial participants, who appreciated the wraps could be adjusted and taken off to allow them to take showers. Staff mentioned, however, that trial participants were prone to loosen the wraps. Whilst 2-layer hosiery allowed for self-application and could be taken off, trial participants said the hosiery was very tight and difficult to apply. Bandages, on the other hand, whilst bulky and sometimes uncomfortable, would often not be removed by trial participants, leading to greater exposure to effective compression.

Conclusion: We have identified that people with venous ulcers wearing compression wraps are more likely to report loosening them and removal at night, than people wearing other types of compression treatment which was confirmed by staff. These reported behaviours could explain longer healing times for compression wraps, compared to other treatments delivered in our RCT. Despite longer times to healing, compression wraps may still be an appropriate compression treatment option for some people, and it is important for nursing staff to have conversations with service users and share decisions about suitable treatment options.

静脉下肢溃疡的压迫治疗:一项随机对照试验的混合方法过程评价,VenUS6。
背景:强力压迫治疗是一种循证的一线治疗方法,有助于缩短下肢静脉性溃疡的愈合时间。VenUS 6是一项在英国进行的三臂随机对照试验,旨在比较4层绷带和2层袜子与压缩绷带和2层绷带。研究发现,与其他治疗方法相比,压缩包不太可能缩短腿部静脉溃疡愈合的时间,尽管这一估计存在一些不确定性。我们在VenUS 6中嵌套了一个混合方法的过程评估,以更深入地了解试验参与者和护理人员对各种压迫疗法的看法和经验,并考虑这些见解如何解释VenUS 6的结果。方法:我们对11名试验参与者进行了个人深度访谈,并与19名相关卫生专业人员进行了焦点小组讨论,这些卫生专业人员来自7个参与NHS信托的初级、二级和社区护理站点。我们还使用了在试验期间从患者那里收集到的关于压迫使用经验的数据。我们与护士进行了一项单独的英国范围的调查,以了解更多关于临床试用压缩治疗方案的可用性以及他们对范围内使用压缩治疗的易用性的看法。定性数据采用框架分析,定量数据采用描述性分析。数据在支柱整合过程的帮助下进行了整合。结果:试验参与者对压缩包裹有很高的满意度和有限的不适,他们欣赏包裹可以调整和取下,让他们洗澡。然而,工作人员提到,试验参与者倾向于松开包装。虽然两层丝袜允许自行涂抹,并且可以脱下,但试验参与者表示,这种丝袜非常紧,难以涂抹。另一方面,绷带虽然笨重,有时不舒服,但通常不会被试验参与者取下,导致更大的暴露于有效的压迫下。结论:我们发现静脉溃疡患者在夜间使用压迫包的情况比使用其他类型压迫治疗的患者更容易报告松动和取出,这一点得到了工作人员的证实。与我们的随机对照试验中提供的其他治疗相比,这些报告的行为可以解释压缩包裹的愈合时间更长。尽管愈合时间较长,但对某些人来说,压缩包装可能仍然是一种合适的压缩治疗选择,护理人员与服务用户进行对话并分享合适的治疗选择的决定是很重要的。
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
Trials
Trials 医学-医学:研究与实验
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
4.00%
发文量
966
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Trials is an open access, peer-reviewed, online journal that will encompass all aspects of the performance and findings of randomized controlled trials. Trials will experiment with, and then refine, innovative approaches to improving communication about trials. We are keen to move beyond publishing traditional trial results articles (although these will be included). We believe this represents an exciting opportunity to advance the science and reporting of trials. Prior to 2006, Trials was published as Current Controlled Trials in Cardiovascular Medicine (CCTCVM). All published CCTCVM articles are available via the Trials website and citations to CCTCVM article URLs will continue to be supported.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书