A systematic review of the impact of compression therapy on quality of life and pain among people with a venous leg ulcer

AIM

To gain a greater understanding of how compression therapy affects quality of life, this systematic review appraised existing published studies measuring the impact of compression therapy on health quality of life (HRQoL), and pain, among people with venous leg ulcers (VLU).

METHOD

Five databases were searched, and two authors extracted data and appraised the quality of selected papers using the RevMan risk of bias tool. Due to heterogeneity in the types of compression and instruments used to evaluate HRQoL, meta-analysis was not appropriate; thus, a narrative synthesis of findings was undertaken.

RESULTS

Ten studies were included, 9 RCTs and one before-after study. The studies employed nine different HRQoL tools to measure the impact of a variety of compression therapy systems, with or without an additional exercise programme, versus other compression systems or usual care, and the results are mixed. With the use of the Cardiff Cardiff Wound Impact Schedule, the SF-8 and the SF-12, study authors found no differences in QoL scores between the study groups. This is similar to one study using QUALYs (Iglesias et al., 2004). Conversely, for studies using EuroQol-5D, VEINES-QOL, SF-36 and CIVIQ-20 differences in QoL scores between the study groups were noted, in favour of the study intervention groups. Two further studies using QUALYs found results that favoured a two-layer cohesive compression bandage and the TLCCB group, respectively. Results for the five studies that assessed pain are also mixed, with one study finding no difference between study groups, one finding that pain increased over the study period and three studies finding that pain reduced in the intervention groups. All studies were assessed as being at risk of bias in one or more domains.

CONCLUSION

Results were varied, reflecting uncertainty in determining the impact of compression therapy on quality of life and pain among people with a venous leg ulcer. The heterogeneity of the compression systems and the measures used to evaluate HRQoL make it a challenge to interpret the overall evidence. Further studies should strive for homogeneity in design, interventions and comparators to enhance both internal and external validity.

Assessing the healthcare costs associated with venous leg ulcer compression bandages - A scoping review

AIM

To determine the monetary costs identified in economic evaluations of treatment with compression bandages among adults with venous leg ulcers (VLU).

METHOD

A scoping review of existing publications was conducted in February 2023. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used.

RESULTS

Ten studies met the inclusion criteria. To place the costs of treatment into context, these are reported in conjunction with the healing rates. Three comparisons were made: 1.4 layer compression versus no compression (3 studies). One study reported that 4 layer compression was more expensive than usual care (£804.03 vs £681.04, respectively), while the 2 other studies reported the converse (£145 vs £162, respectively) and all costs (£116.87 vs £240.28 respectively). Within the three studies, the odds of healing were statistically significantly greater with 4 layer bandaging (OR: 2.20; 95% CI: 1.54-3.15; p = 0.001).; 2.4 layer compression versus other compression (6 studies). For the three studies reporting the mean costs per patient associated with treatment (bandages alone), over the treatment period, analysis identified a mean difference (MD) in costs for 4 layer vs comparator 1 (2 layer compression, short-stretch compression, 2 layer compression hosiery, 2 layer cohesive compression, 2 layer compression) of -41.60 (95% CI: 91.40 to 8.20; p = 0.10). The OR of healing for 4 layer compression vs comparator 1 (2 layer compression, short-stretch compression, 2 layer compression hosiery, 2 layer cohesive compression, 2 layer compression) is: 0.70 (95% CI: 0.57-0.85; p = 0.004). For 4 layer vs comparator 2 (2 layer compression) the MD is: 14.00 (95% CI: 53.66 to -25.66; p < 0.49). The OR of healing for 4 layer compression vs comparator 2 (2 layer compression) is: 3.26 (95% CI: 2.54-4.18; p < 0.00001). For comparator 1 (2 layer compression, short-stretch compression, 2 layer compression hosiery, 2 layer cohesive compression, 2 layer compression) vs comparator 2 (2 layer compression) the MD in costs is: 55.60 (95% CI: 95.26 to -15.94; p = 0.006). The OR of healing with Comparator 1 (2 layer compression, short-stretch compression, 2 layer compression hosiery, 2 layer cohesive compression, 2 layer compression) is: 5.03 (95% CI:4.10-6.17; p < 0.00001). Three studies presented the mean annual costs per patient associated with treatment (all costs). The MD is 172 (150-194; p = 0.401), indicating no statistically significant difference in costs between the groups. All studies showed faster healing rates in the 4 layer study groups. 3. Compression wrap versus inelastic bandage (one study). Compression wrap was less expensive than inelastic bandage (£201 vs £335, respectively) with more wounds healing in the compression wrap group (78.8%, n = 26/33; 69.7%, n = 23/33).

CONCLUSION

The results for the analysis of costs varied across the included studies. As with the primary outcome, the results indicated that the costs of compression therapy are inconsistent. Given the methodological heterogeneity among studies, future studies in this area are needed and these should use specific methodological guidelines to generate high-quality health economic studies.

A meta-review of the impact of compression therapy on venous leg ulcer healing

This meta-review aimed to appraise and synthesise findings from existing systematic reviews that measured the impact of compression therapy on venous leg ulcers healing. We searched five databases to identify potential papers; three authors extracted data, and a fourth author adjudicated the findings. The AMSTAR-2 tool was used for quality appraisal and the certainty of the evidence was appraised using GRADEpro. Data analysis was undertaken using RevMan. We identified 12 systematic reviews published between 1997 and 2021. AMSTAR-2 assessment identified three as high quality, five as moderate quality, and four as low quality. Seven comparisons were reported, with a meta-analysis undertaken for five of these comparisons: compression vs no compression (risk ratio [RR]: 1.55; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-1.78; P < .00001; moderate-certainty evidence); elastic compression vs inelastic compression (RR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.96-1.08; P < .61 moderate-certainty evidence); four layer vs <four-layer bandage systems (RR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.82-1.40; P < .63; moderate-certainty evidence); comparison between different four-layer bandage systems (RR: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.93-1.25; P = .34; moderate-certainty evidence); compression bandage vs compression stocking (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.87-1.03; P = .18; moderate-certainty evidence). The main conclusion from this review is that there is a statistically significant difference in healing rates when compression is used compared with no compression, with moderate-certainty evidence. Otherwise, there is no statistically different difference in healing rates using elastic compression vs inelastic compression, four layer vs <four-layer bandage systems, different four-layer bandage systems, or compression bandages vs compression stockings.