Multi-layer compression: comparison of four different four-layer bandage systems applied to the leg

Abstract

Objective: To compare on standardized laboratory models the performance of four commercially available four-layer bandage systems. Methods: Four experienced bandagers applied each of the four systems [Profore® Regular (Smith & Nephew, Hull, UK), Ultra Four (Robinsons, Chesterfield, UK), System 4 (SSL International, Knutsford, UK) and K-Four® (Parema, Loughborough, UK)] to two models: a 12.5 cm diameter padded cylinder and a 9.5-14.5 cm padded cone. Bandages were applied individually in single layers and as a completed system using standard application techniques. Pressures were measured by the Borgnis Medical Stocking Tester at positions corresponding to ankle, gaiter and mid-calf areas as determined by the pressure sensor. Results: A total of 768 observations were made: 384 for each model, 192 for each bandaging system, 192 for each bandager and 128 for each measuring point. The increase in pressure produced by each additional layer was in the range of 50-60% of the pressure achieved by the same bandage when used as a single layer. Each bandage system and each bandager produced a gradient of final mean pressure irrespective of whether the bandage was applied to a cylinder or a cone. However, there were no significant differences in the gradients between the four bandage systems or between the four bandagers. There were significant differences in the final pressures achieved among the bandage systems when applied as completed systems (mean: Profore® = 42 mmHg; System 4 = 45 mmHg; K-Four® = 48 mmHg; and Ultra Four = 51 mmHg; P<0.001). Conclusions: These results challenge a commonly-held assumption concerning the additive effect of pressures generated by successive bandage layers. When applied as part of a multi-layered system each bandage adds just over half the pressure achieved by the same bandage when applied alone. The four completed systems produced pressures within a range appropriate for ulcer therapy, although there were significant differences in mean pressures. This capability of the systems to produce different pressures could be clinically important in the hands of inexperienced bandagers or with patients at risk of pressure damage..