| Literature DB >> 32299481 |
Lingyuan Zeng1, Yongrong Wang2, Dongdong He3, Yao He3, Yuze Wang3, Xiaochun Wei3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effectiveness of a self-made modular elastic compression device for patients with a fracture of the tibia and fibula.Entities:
Keywords: Combined elastic compression device; Compression therapy; ERAS surgery; Fracture of tibia and fibula; Modular
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32299481 PMCID: PMC7164288 DOI: 10.1186/s13018-020-01678-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Orthop Surg Res ISSN: 1749-799X Impact factor: 2.359
Comparison of the degree of soft tissue swelling between two groups (x ± s)
| Time | Pre-operative | Post-operative | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Test group | Control group | Test group | Control group | |||||||
| Participants | Degree of swelling (%) | Participants | Degree of swelling (%) | Participants | Degree of swelling (%) | Participants | Degree of swelling (%) | |||
| 1 day | 29 | 12.9 | 30 | 13.8 | > 0.05 | 29 | 11 | 30 | 22.3% | < 0.05 |
| 2 days | 23 | 9.7 | 28 | 14.4 | < 0.05 | 29 | 7.0 | 30 | 23.7 | < 0.05 |
| 3 days | 14 | 8.3 | 26 | 15.7 | < 0.05 | 17 | 6.5 | 30 | 20.5 | < 0.05 |
| 4 days | 4 | 5.6 | 25 | 10.5 | < 0.05 | 9 | 4.9 | 25 | 17.6 | < 0.05 |
| 5 days | 1 | 5.1 | 22 | 7.3 | < 0.05 | 6 | 3.5 | 18 | 16.4 | < 0.05 |
| 6 days | 0 | 17 | 6.8 | 1 | 3.4 | 12 | 15.2 | < 0.05 | ||
| 7 days | 0 | 2 | 6.4 | 0 | 5 | 11.6 | ||||
| 8 days | 0 | 1 | 3.1 | 1 | 11.2 | |||||
| Average admission days | 3.3 ± 1.2 | 6.3 ± 1.2 | 3.1 ± 1.4 | 7.3 ± 1.2 | ||||||
The beginning of the time is the first day after the exclusion of compartment syndrome. The degree of soft tissue swelling = (circumference of affected limb − circumference of healthy limb)/circumference of healthy limb × 100%, mild < 10%, 10 ~ 15% moderate, and severe > 15 (26)
Fig. 1The comparison before and after treatment. a The modular combination of the lower extremity segmental compression device. b The experimental group after the placement of the lower extremity pressure device. c For the first day after opening the pressure device, the limb circumference diameter slightly increased and was relatively slender. d A part of c, no obvious subcutaneous ecchymosis, visible skin lines are still present. e The control group on the first day after opening the dressing, the peripheral diameter of the limbs increased significantly and was more swollen. f A part of e, obvious subcutaneous ecchymosis, the swelling is significant, and the skin is oily and bright.
Comparison of blood loss between the two groups (x ± s, n = 30)
| Group | Change in hemoglobin volume at admission and discharge (g/L) | Number of patients with indwelling drainage tube | Cumulative drain volume (ml) | Post-operative drain retention (days) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Test group | 11.2 ± 6.5 g/L | 9 | 120 ± 60 | 2.0 ± 0.8 |
| Control group | 30.3 ± 10.4 | 7 | 260 ± 50 | 3.5 ± 1.2 |
| < 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 |
The change in hemoglobin volume at admission and discharge was all patients in both groups
Comparison of postoperative pain index between two groups (x ± s, n = 30)
| Group | Day 1 | Day 2 | Day 3 | Day 4 | Day 5 | Day 6 | Day 7 | Day 8 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Test group | 4.7 ± 1.1 | 8.1 ± 2.2 | 3.5 ± 1.2 | 2.2. ± 0.5 | 1.6 ± 0.3 | 1.5 ± 0.6 | 1.2 ± 0.5 | 1.0 ± 0.2 |
| Control group | 7.6 ± 1.4 | 9.3 + 0.5 | 6.9 ± 1.5 | 5.4 ± 1.6 | 4.6 ± 1.5 | 3.7 ± 1.2 | 3.2 ± 0.4 | 2.7 ± 0 |
| P | < 0.05 | > 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 | < 0.05 |
Visual analog scale (VAS) (28) was used for the assessment of pain. Clinical evaluation divides “0 ~ 2” into “Excellent”, “3 to 5” into “Good”, “6 to 8” into “Fair”, “> 8” into “Poor”
Comparison of pressure injury data between the two groups (x ± s, n = 30)
| Group | Stage 1 | Stage 2 | Stage 3 | Stage 4 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experiment group | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| Control group | 7 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 8 |
| < 0.05 | < 0.05 |
2016 National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Committee (NPUAP) on pressure injury divided into 4 stages (29): Stage 1: intact skin with erythema with constant digital pressure. Stage 2: partial cortical defect with dermal exposure. Phase 3: full-thickness defect of skin with exposed adipose tissue, usually visible granulation tissue or internal roll of wound edge, and local slough and/or eschar. Ulcers, with visible or palpable fascia, muscle, tendon, ligament, cartilage or bone exposed, may also have slough and/or eschar localized to the full thickness of the skin and tissue defects in Stage 4
Comparison of VTE risk assessment between the two groups
| Group | Caprini highest score (x ± s) | Number of thromboses |
|---|---|---|
| Test Group | 7.1 ± 1.6 | 3 |
| Control Group | 7.2 ± 1.5 | 8 |
| > 0.05 |
The 2009 version of the Caprini risk assessment model, which includes more than 40 different risk factors such as age, bed rest, surgery, history of thrombotic diseases, family history of thrombosis, etc., each risk factor is assigned 1–5 points according to different risk levels, respectively. According to the total score of risk factors of patients, the risk of VTE occurrence of patients is divided into 4 grades: low risk (0 ~ 1 point), moderate risk (2 points), high risk (3 ~ 4 points), and very high risk (≥ 5 points). Lower limb fracture is a very high risk factor (27)