Abstract
Background
Stiffness is an independent determinant of compression therapy efficacy, beyond compression pressure alone. Three indices — static stiffness index (SSI), dynamic stiffness index (DSI), and walking pressure amplitude (WPA) — quantify stiffness. This study evaluated in vivo stiffness in eight compression stocking models to assess whether those marketed as “strong-elastic” differ significantly from those marketed as “light-elastic”.
Methods
In a prospective, open-label pilot study, 10 healthy participants were each fitted with eight off-the-shelf AG II compression stocking models (4 “strong-elastic”, 4 “light-elastic”). Continuous pressure monitoring was conducted at four standardized anatomical sites (B, B1, C, D) of the right lower extremity using the Picopress® system. A total of 320 measurement cycles were completed. Data were analyzed by comparing grouped results for “strong” vs. “elastic” stockings.
Results
The SSI did not differ significantly between “strong-elastic” (stMCS) and “light-elastic” (elMCS) stockings at any site (p > .05). However, stMCS showed significantly higher DSI at sites B (4.55 ± 2.00 mmHg vs 3.90 ± 1.63 mmHg; p = .028), C (5.83 ± 2.28 mmHg vs 5.10 ± 1.82 mmHg; p = .015), and D (2.33 ± 1.16 mmHg vs 1.58 ± 0.87 mmHg; p < .001). For WPA, stMCS exhibited significantly higher stiffness at B1 (6.75 ± 2.26 mmHg vs 6.03 ± 2.27 mmHg; p = .018), C (4.33 ± 2.31 mmHg vs 3.73 ± 2.24 mmHg; p = .020), and D (6.25 ± 2.07 mmHg vs 4.23 ± 1.59 mmHg; p < .001). Mean lower leg circumference increased from 0.50 cm (D) to 1.05 cm (C), depending on movement.
Conclusion
At B1, no significant differences in SSI or DSI were found between “strong-elastic” and “light-elastic” stockings, whereas WPA significantly differentiated both groups. Overall stiffness values exceeded previous reports, indicating both stMCS and elMCS possess substantial stiffness and likely improve venous hemodynamics.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.