Maintaining sleep while improving overnight mobility and comfort with a novel lower limb external mechanical compression system

Abstract

BackgroundVenous thromboembolism is prevalent, associated with a high degree of morbidity and mortality, and largely preventable. External mechanical compression is a standard of care for prevention, but compliance with traditional external mechanical compression devices is low due to patient reported issues with comfort, mobility, usability, noise, and sleep disturbances. The purpose of this study was to compare user-rated comfort, mobility, usability, noise, perceived sleep disturbance, and objective sleep disturbance for a novel external lower limb mechanical compression device as compared to a standard sequential compression device. MethodUsing a 2-day counterbalanced, within-subject repeated-measures design, 16 participants wore two mechanical compression devices, the commonly-used Kendall SCD Express 9525 (SCD) and the novel Recovery Force Movement and Compressions Device (RF-MAC) for 1 night each in their home while sleep was recorded with polysomnography. For each device, participants also completed questionnaires to assess usability, mobility, perceived noise disturbance, and perceived sleep disturbance. ResultsThe novel RF-MAC device was significantly more comfortable and less noisy than the Kendall SCD. There was marginal evidence that participants sleep longer when wearing the RF-MAC compared to the SCD. User-rated usability, perceived sleep disturbance, and other objective sleep disturbance measures did not differ significantly between the two devices. ConclusionPatients and clinicians should consider the impact of external mechanical compression devices on user comfort and sleep to improve patient compliance.