Community RCT of the Effectiveness of Two Compression Bandaging Technologies

NCT ID: NCT00202267

Last Updated: 2015-11-20

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

PHASE2

Total Enrollment

426 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2004-01-31

Study Completion Date

2008-12-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Leg ulcers are emotionally distressing and painful, and often require months or years to heal. Although rarely acknowledged as a pressing health care issue, leg ulcers comprise a common, complex, and costly condition, managed primarily through community home care services. Indeed, leg ulcers are the most frequently seen and treated chronic wound. There is consensus in recent international, evidence-based practice guidelines that graduated, multi-layer compression is the most effective treatment, and greatly reduces healing time. High compression is more effective than low compression. However, there is no clear evidence as to which high compression technology is the most effective in promoting healing, the most acceptable to patients, or the most cost-effective to the health care system. This study is designed to answer these questions through a randomized trial conducted in the community, where most leg ulcer care currently takes place. Issues such as effectiveness in healing, quality of life, physical discomfort, personal preference, cost to the system and to the individual will be taken into consideration in evaluating two most commonly used types of compression bandaging.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Background:

Although rarely recognized as a pressing health care problem, leg ulcers comprise a common, complex, and costly condition. Over 80% of ongoing management of chronic wounds occurs in the community, and leg ulcers are one of the most frequently seen chronic wounds. The cost of leg ulcer care is considerable, being reported in both the UK and France to account for 2% of their total national health budgets. In Canada, the impact is only now being recognized due to the pressure on home care caseloads resulting from hospital downsizing, nursing shortages, and growing numbers of complex health populations. In one Ontario study, the care for fewer than 200 community leg ulcer cases cost in excess of $1.5 million for supplies and nursing visits, which translates to $100s of millions yearly Canada-wide. The impact on the individual is significant--chronic, painful, and often takes years to heal. Two-thirds of individuals with leg ulcers have at least one recurrence, and 45% have a history with the condition dating back 10 years.

State of Knowledge \& Clinical Practice Guidelines:

Over the past decade, evidence from RCT studies and a recent Cochrane systematic review in BMJ demonstrated that venous leg ulcers treated with compression therapy are more likely to heal. Multi-layer high compression systems are more effective than low compression. However, the small number of people in trials comparing different high compression systems meant the review was unable to draw conclusions about their relative merit. Four of these trials have compared 4-layer bandage with short stretch technologies--the most commonly used technologies in Canada. In total, these trials involved only 220 patients, and were thus underpowered. Furthermore, they did not consider factors such as client preference and ease of use, or incorporate an economic evaluation.

Plan of Investigation:

The study will be a multi-centre, pragmatic, randomised trial of two types of compression bandaging technologies, incorporating an economic evaluation.

Research objective: To compare the effectiveness of 2 high compression technologies delivered in the community on ulcer healing, recurrence rates, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness.

Interventions: Four-layer bandage vs. Short-stretch bandage. Sample size: 414 total, 207 in each arm (80% power, " 0.05 to detect 4 week difference in time to heal).

Inclusion Criteria: leg ulcer\>1 cm in any one dimension, minimum duration of 1 week, ABPI\>0.7.

Randomization: will be carried out and stratified by: Clinical Centre (3 Health Regions in Ontario); Margolis' Prognostic Model (ulcer area and duration), Ulcer episode (1st or recurrent ulcer).

Analysis: Primary outcome: time-to-healing of the reference ulcer.

Secondary outcomes: quality of life \& expenditures for treatment. Durability of healing will be assessed-follow-up for up to 52 weeks post-healing to determine recurrence rates associated with both technologies.

Summary:

There is consensus internationally in recommending the application of graduated multi-layer compression. High compression is more effective than low compression; however, there is no clear evidence as to which high compression technology is more effective.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Venous Ulcer

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

1

Clients randomized to short-stretch bandaging application

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Short-stretch Bandage (Non-elastomeric)

Intervention Type DEVICE

These bandages are applied in a figure-eight technique; two bandages are applied at full extension in opposite directions up the leg (i.e., clockwise and counter clockwise). The participant will wash the short-stretch wherever possible and reused. The number of bandages supplied to each patient will be recorded on the visit record.

2

Clients randomized to four-layer bandaging application

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Four-layer Bandage (Elastomeric)

Intervention Type DEVICE

Precise components of the four-layer system depend on the circumference of the ankle. All the bandages are discarded after a single use, usually one week.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Four-layer Bandage (Elastomeric)

Precise components of the four-layer system depend on the circumference of the ankle. All the bandages are discarded after a single use, usually one week.

Intervention Type DEVICE

Short-stretch Bandage (Non-elastomeric)

These bandages are applied in a figure-eight technique; two bandages are applied at full extension in opposite directions up the leg (i.e., clockwise and counter clockwise). The participant will wash the short-stretch wherever possible and reused. The number of bandages supplied to each patient will be recorded on the visit record.

Intervention Type DEVICE

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Profore bandaging system (Smith & Nephew Medical Ltd.) Comprilan (Beiersdorf-Jobst, Inc.)

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* clinical presentation of venous insufficiency
* leg ulcer equal to or larger than 0.7 cm in any one dimension
* ulcer a minimum duration of 1 week
* ankle brachial pressure index equal to or greater than 0.80
* participant can provide written consent
* participant can communicate in English, or translation available
* participant 18 years or over

Exclusion Criteria

* diagnosed with Diabetes Mellitus - insulin dependent or participant on oral hypoglycemics
* participants who failed to improve over a 3-month period after being treated with either the SS or 4-layer compression bandaging system prior to the trial
* previous trial patients (ie individuals previously enrolled in the study but now have recurrence or a new ulcer)
* symptoms of cognitive impairment noted
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)

OTHER_GOV

Sponsor Role collaborator

Queen's University

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Dr. Margaret Harrison

Principal Investigator

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Margaret B Harrison, PhD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Queen's University

Ian D Graham, PhD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

University of Ottawa (co-investigator)

Elizabeth A Nelson, PhD

Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR

University of Leeds, UK (co-investigator)

Karen Lorimer, MNSc

Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR

Victorian Order of Nurses (co-investigator)

Connie Harris, MNSc

Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR

ET NOW (co-investigator)

Elizabeth VanDenKerkhof, PhD

Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR

School of Nursing, Queen's University

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Winnipeg Regional Health Authority

Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

Site Status

Nursing Practice Solutions

Fort Erie, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

VON Hamilton Branch

Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Saint Elizabeth Health Care

Kingston, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Kingston Chronic Wound Clinic

Kingston, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

ParaMed Health Services

Kingston, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

ET Now

Kitchener, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Carefor

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

ParaMed Health Services

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

St. Joseph's Care Group

Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

St. Michael's Hospital

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

ParaMed Home Health Care

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Comcare Health

Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Ostomy and Wound Care Centre

Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada

Site Status

Saskatoon Health Region Home Care

Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Canada

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Vandenkerkhof EG, Hopman WM, Carley ME, Kuhnke JL, Harrison MB. Leg ulcer nursing care in the community: a prospective cohort study of the symptom of pain. BMC Nurs. 2013 Feb 6;12:3. doi: 10.1186/1472-6955-12-3.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 23388350 (View on PubMed)

Pham B, Harrison MB, Chen MH, Carley ME; Canadian Bandaging Trial Group. Cost-effectiveness of compression technologies for evidence-informed leg ulcer care: results from the Canadian Bandaging Trial. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Oct 2;12:346. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-12-346.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 23031428 (View on PubMed)

Harrison MB, Vandenkerkhof EG, Hopman WM, Graham ID, Carley ME, Nelson EA; Canadian Bandaging Trial Group. The Canadian Bandaging Trial: Evidence-informed leg ulcer care and the effectiveness of two compression technologies. BMC Nurs. 2011 Oct 13;10:20. doi: 10.1186/1472-6955-10-20.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 21995267 (View on PubMed)

Related Links

Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.

http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/

Canadian Institutes of Health Research

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

394622

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: secondary_id

MCT 63175

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id