Lower extremity compression is effective in treating various vascular and wound conditions. Assessment of IP variations along limb length and under different compression applications are limited. This work quantified both local and gradient in vivo IP map with a piezoresistive (PR) sensor under three different compression applications when applied to the right leg of forty healthy subjects (n = 40). Compression applications included elastic stockinette, EdemaWear (EW), a pre-packaged compression set, CoFlex TLC (CF) and a combination application, CF applied over EW (Both = BO). Results showed statistical variations in local pressures and pressure gradients that varied by condition, body position, and post 10 min of exercise. Immediately post application significant differences between all compression conditions were observed at both distal and proximal measurement points, ranging from 10.8 ± 4.2 mmHg for supine EW to 38.2 ± 10.7 mmHg for standing BO. A non-uniform reduction in IP was observed post a brief period of wear under CF and BO, but not EW. The largest decrease was observed at the proximal measurement point under BO (37% reduction). Rate of change in IP proximal to distal ranging from −2.4 to 3.4 mmHg/in. Vertical patterning that mirrored the structural design of the EW was observed in some, but not all, of the pressure maps for the BO application only. The use of the PR sensor for capturing in vivo IP profiles may provide a more comprehensive understanding of the compression effect, highlighting the importance of considering variation in IP across the limb over a period of wear.
LurieFMalgorRDCarmanT, et al. The American Venous Forum, American Vein and Lymphatic Society and the Society for Vascular Medicine expert opinion consensus on lymphedema diagnosis and treatment. Phlebology2022; 37(4): 252–266.
2.
VowdenPKAMostiG. Demystifying mild, moderate and high compression systems – when and how to introduce “lighter” compression. Wounds Int2020: 1: 1–25.
3.
ShiCDumvilleJCCullumN, et al. Compression bandages or stockings versus no compression for treating venous leg ulcers. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2021; 7(7): Cd013397.
4.
MilicDJZivicSSBogdanovicDC, et al. The influence of different sub-bandage pressure values in the prevention of recurrence of venous ulceration – a ten year follow-up. Phlebology2023; 38(7): 458–465.
5.
PartschHClarkMBassezS, et al. Measurement of lower leg compression in vivo: recommendations for the performance of measurements of interface pressure and stiffness: consensus statement. Dermatol Surg2006; 32(2): 224–232.
6.
ChiYWLinRTsengKH, et al. Effect of subsurface pressure on the interface pressure measurement in an in vitro experiment. Phlebology2020; 35(2): 134–138.
7.
MarstonWACarlinREPassmanMA, et al. Healing rates and cost efficacy of outpatient compression treatment for leg ulcers associated with venous insufficiency. J Vasc Surg1999; 30(3): 491–498.
8.
RaffettoJDLigiDManiscalcoR, et al. Why venous leg ulcers have difficulty healing: overview on pathophysiology, clinical consequences, and treatment. J Clin Med2020; 10(1): 1–29.
9.
BernatchezSFEysaman-WalkerJWeirD.Venous leg ulcers: a review of published assessment and treatment algorithms. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle)2022; 11(1): 28–41.
10.
MostiGCavezziA.Compression therapy in lymphedema: between past and recent scientific data. Phlebology2019; 34(8): 515–522.
11.
RabeEPartschHHafnerJ, et al. Indications for medical compression stockings in venous and lymphatic disorders: an evidence-based consensus statement. Phlebology2018; 33(3): 163–184.
12.
MostiGPartschH.Compression stockings with a negative pressure gradient have a more pronounced effect on venous pumping function than graduated elastic compression stockings. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2011; 42(2): 261–266.
13.
CouzanSLeizoroviczALaporteS, et al. A randomized double-blind trial of upward progressive versus degressive compressive stockings in patients with moderate to severe chronic venous insufficiency. J Vasc Surg2012; 56(5): 1344–1350.e1.
14.
PartschH.Compression for the management of venous leg ulcers: which material do we have?Phlebology2014; 29(1 suppl): 140–145.
15.
PartschHSchurenJMostiG, et al. The Static Stiffness Index: an important parameter to characterise compression therapy in vivo. J Wound Care2016; 25(Suppl 9): S4-s10.
16.
RabeEPartschHMorrisonN, et al. Risks and contraindications of medical compression treatment – a critical reappraisal. An international consensus statement. Phlebology2020; 35(7): 447–460.
17.
EhmannS.Case report to demonstrate the need for selection criteria for optimal adjustable Velcro wrap prescription. J Wound Care2018; 27(1): S10–S17.
18.
EhmannSWalkerKJBaileyCM, et al. Experimental simulation study to assess pressure distribution of different compression applications applied over an innovative primary wound dressing. Wounds2020; 32(12): 353–363.
19.
BjorkREhmannS.STRIDE Professional guide to compression garment selection for the lower extremity. J Wound Care2019; 28(Sup6a): 1–44.
20.
EhmannSFazzarriEEriksonHB. Fuzzy wale compression (FWC) stockinette delivers positive pressure wound therapy (PPWT). In: Proceedings of the SAWC; Las Vegas, NV, USA. New York: IEEE.
21.
NairHKRLewXLiewKY, et al. Efficacy of Mobiderm® bandage in compression therapy for venous ulcers: a prospective case series. Int J Low Extrem Wounds2023; 22(4): 759–766.
22.
TakanishiYOgawaYHamadaY, et al. Hybrid approach to treating severe lower extremity lymphoedema: case report. J Lymphoedema2018; 13(1): 12–15.
23.
NandasiriGKShahidiAMDiasT.Study of three interface pressure measurement systems used in the treatment of venous disease. Sensors (Basel)2020; 20(20): s5777.
24.
ChiYWTsengKHLiR, et al. Comparison of piezoresistive sensor to PicoPress® in in-vitro interface pressure measurement. Phlebology2018; 33(5): 315–320.
25.
NingJFishJTrinhF, et al. Comparison of three pressure monitors used to measure interface pressure under compression bandages. Phlebology2020; 35(4): 262–267.
26.
ParmarSKhodasevychITroynikovO.Evaluation of flexible force sensors for pressure monitoring in treatment of chronic venous disorders. Sensors (Basel)2017; 17(8): 1923.
27.
KhodasevychIParmarSTroynikovO.Flexible sensors for pressure therapy: effect of substrate curvature and stiffness on sensor performance. Sensors (Basel)2017; 17(10): 2399.
28.
NingJMaWFishJ, et al. Interface pressure changes under compression bandages during period of wearing. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord2021; 9(4): 971–976.
29.
RimaudDConvertRCalmelsP.In vivo measurement of compression bandage interface pressures: the first study. Ann Phys Rehabil Med2014; 57(6–7): 394–408.
30.
RiebeHKonschakeWHaaseH, et al. Interface pressure and venous drainage of two compression stocking types in healthy volunteers and in patients with hemodynamic disturbances of the legs. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc2015; 61(2): 175–183.
31.
ChassagneFMartinFBadelP, et al. Experimental investigation of pressure applied on the lower leg by elastic compression bandage. Ann Biomed Eng2015; 43(12): 2967–2977.
32.
KruanopparatR.Pressure-measuring devices for compression therapy in venous leg ulcers: a comprehensive review. Adv Skin Wound Care2021; 34(9): 1–6.
33.
MehmoodNHarizATempletonS, et al. An improved flexible telemetry system to autonomously monitor sub-bandage pressure and wound moisture. Sensors (Basel)2014; 14(11): 21770–21790.
34.
RabeEPartschHJüngerM, et al. Guidelines for clinical studies with compression devices in patients with venous disorders of the lower limb. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2008; 35(4): 494–500.
35.
KokaiOKilbreathSLMcLaughlinP, et al. The accuracy and precision of interface pressure measuring devices: a systematic review. Phlebology2021; 36(9): 678–694.
36.
SchurenJ.In vitro measurements of compression bandages and bandage systems: a review of existing methods and recommendations for improvement. Veins Lymphat2014; 3(1): 2107.
37.
CieślakMKaraszewskaAGromadzińskaE, et al. Comparison of methods for measurement of the pressure exerted by knitted fabrics. Textile Res J2017; 87(17): 2117–2126.
38.
KarafaMKarafovaA.Kikuhime device in the management of venous leg ulcers. Clin Interv Aging2020; 15: 1533–1539.
39.
KhaburiJADehghani-SanijAANelsonEA, et al. Measurement of interface pressure applied by medical compression bandages. In: 2011 IEEE international conference on mechatronics and automation; 7–10August2011; Session 2152-744X. New York: IEEE.
40.
MostiGIabichellaMLPartschH.Compression therapy in mixed ulcers increases venous output and arterial perfusion. J Vasc Surg2012; 55(1): 122–128.
41.
MostiGPartschH.Inelastic bandages maintain their hemodynamic effectiveness over time despite significant pressure loss. J Vasc Surg2010; 52(4): 925–931.
42.
MostiGPartschH.Improvement of venous pumping function by double progressive compression stockings: higher pressure over the calf is more important than a graduated pressure profile. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2014; 47(5): 545–549.
43.
MostiGPartschH.A new two component compression system turning an elastic bandage into an inelastic compression device: interface pressure, stiffness, and haemodynamic effectiveness. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2018; 55(1): 126–131.
44.
MostiGPartschH.A wearable compression device to normalise calf muscle pump function in chronic venous insufficiency for each postural position. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2019; 57(5): 702–707.
45.
ProtzKDissemondJKarbeD, et al. Increasing competence in compression therapy for venous leg ulcers through training and exercise measured by a newly developed score – results of a randomised controlled intervention study. Wound Repair Regen2021; 29(2): 261–269.
46.
ProtzKHeyerKVerheyen-CronauI, et al. Loss of interface pressure in various compression bandage systems over seven days. Dermatology2014; 229(4): 343–352.
47.
DamstraRJPartschH.Prospective, randomized, controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of adjustable compression Velcro wraps versus inelastic multicomponent compression bandages in the initial treatment of leg lymphedema. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord2013; 1(1): 13–19.
48.
PartschHMostiG.Comparison of three portable instruments to measure compression pressure. Int Angiol2010; 29(5): 426–430.
49.
FoliIMazzocchiTPaolettiC, et al. Pressure mapping with textile sensors for compression therapy monitoring. Proc Inst Mech Eng H2016; 230(8): 795–808.
50.
HagemanDJWuSLatimerD, et al. Comprehensive pressure profiling to develop next-generation compression treatment for lymphedema: testing efficacy of high resolution sensors. Sensors Actuators A Phys2019; 289: 100–107.
BrimacombeJM.WilsonDRHodgsonAJ, et al. Effect of calibration method on Tekscan sensor accuracy. ASME J Biomech Eng2009; 131(3): 034503.
53.
WilsonDRAprelevaMVEichlerMJ, et al. Accuracy and repeatability of a pressure measurement system in the patellofemoral joint, J Biomech2003; 36(12): 1909–1915.
54.
HarrisMLMorbergPBruceWJM, et al. An improved method for measuring tibiofemoral contact areas in total knee arthroplasty: a comparison of K-scan sensor and Fuji film. J Biomech1999; 32(9): 951–958.
55.
EhmannSMayrovitzHN.Variation in leg tissue dielectric constant values of healthy young adult females with and without compression bandaging. Cureus2023; 15(5): e38647.
56.
PartschH.Compression therapy: clinical and experimental evidence. Ann Vasc Dis2012; 5(4): 416–422.
57.
MoffattC.Compression therpay in practice. London: Wound UK Publishing, 2007; 228 pp.
58.
GianesiniSObiAOnidaS, et al. Global guidelines trends and controversies in lower limb venous and lymphatic disease: narrative literature revision and experts’ opinions following the vWINter international meeting in Phlebology, Lymphology & Aesthetics, 23–25 January 2019. Phlebology2019; 34(1 Suppl): 4–66.
59.
PartschH.Compression heals leg ulcers due to abolishment of venous reflux. J Wound Care2019; 28(7): 427.
60.
SchurenJ.The efficacy of Laplace’s equation in calculating bandage pressure in venous leg ulcers. Wounds UK2008; 4(2): 38–47.
61.
SchurenJMohrK.Pascal’s law and the dynamics of compression therapy: a study on healthy volunteers. Int Angiol2010; 29(5): 431–435.
62.
SchurenJBernatchezSFTuckerJ, et al. 3M Coban 2 layer compression therapy: intelligent compression dynamics to suit different patient needs. Adv Wound Care (New Rochelle)2012; 1(6): 255–258.
63.
Al KhaburiJNelsonEAHutchinsonJ, et al. Impact of variation in limb shape on sub-bandage interface pressure. Phlebology2011; 26(1): 20–28.
64.
Al KhaburiJNelsonEAHutchinsonJ, et al. Impact of multilayered compression bandages on sub-bandage interface pressure: a model. Phlebology2011; 26(2): 75–83.
65.
Al KhaburiJDehghani-SanijAANelsonEA, et al. Effect of bandage thickness on interface pressure applied by compression bandages. Med Eng Phys2012; 34(3): 378–385.
66.
MilicDJZivicSSBogdanovicDC, et al. The influence of different sub-bandage pressure values on venous leg ulcers healing when treated with compression therapy. J Vasc Surg2010; 51(3): 655–661.
67.
MostiG.Compression in mixed ulcers: venous side. Phlebology2014; 29(1 Suppl): 13–17.
68.
JonkerMJde BoerEMAdèrHJ, et al. The oedema-protective effect of Lycra support stockings. Dermatology2001; 203(4): 294–298.
69.
ClarkeMJBroderickCHopewellS, et al. Compression stockings for preventing deep vein thrombosis in airline passengers. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2021; 4(4): Cd004002.
70.
PartschHWinigerJLunB.Compression stockings reduce occupational leg swelling. Dermatol Surg2004; 30(5): 737–743.
71.
IvinsNJonesN.Two-layer reduced compression system for lower limb wounds: a non-comparative evaluation. Br J Community Nurs2020; 25(Sup4): S10-S16.
72.
LimSLXChungREHollowayS, et al. Modified compression therapy in mixed arterial-venous leg ulcers: an integrative review. Int Wound J2021; 18(6): 822–842.
73.
CouzanSAssanteCLaporteS, et al. Booster study: comparative evaluation of a new concept of elastic stockings in mild venous insufficiency. Presse Med2009; 38(3): 355–361.
74.
LiuRKwokYLLiY, et al. Skin pressure profiles and variations with body postural changes beneath medical elastic compression stockings. Int J Dermatol2007; 46(5): 514–523.
75.
LiuRKwokYLLiY, et al. Objective evaluation of skin pressure distribution of graduated elastic compression stockings. Dermatol Surg2005; 31(6): 615–624.
76.
EhmannSOrtegaAEHettrickH.Textile composition, not number of layers, impacts interphase pressure and static stiffness index: a pragmatic, comparative analysis of the in vivo interphase pressure of 7 different 2-layer cohesive bandage kits in healthy volunteers. Wound Manag Prev2023; 69(2): 14–25.
77.
HiraiMKoyamaAMiyazakiK, et al. Interface pressure and stiffness in different combinations of compression material. Phlebology2012; 27(2): 82–89.
78.
MostiGMattalianoVPartschH.Influence of different materials in multicomponent bandages on pressure and stiffness of the final bandage. Dermatol Surg2008; 34(5): 631–639.
79.
LeeAJDaleJJRuckleyCV, et al. Compression therapy: effects of posture and application techniques on initial pressures delivered by bandages of different physical properties. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2006; 31(5): 542–552.
80.
DaleJJRuckleyCVGibsonB, et al. Multi-layer compression: comparison of four different four-layer bandage systems applied to the leg. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2004; 27(1): 94–99.
81.
WelshL.What is the existing evidence supporting the efficacy of compression bandage systems containing both elastic and inelastic components (mixed-component systems)? A systematic review. J Clin Nurs2017; 26(9–10): 1189–1203.
82.
BlairSDWrightDDBackhouseCM, et al. Sustained compression and healing of chronic venous ulcers. Br Med J1988; 297(6657): 1159–1161.
83.
HafnerJBotonakisIBurgG.A comparison of multilayer bandage systems during rest, exercise, and over 2 days of wear time. Arch Dermatol2000; 136(7): 857–863.
84.
PartschH.The static stiffness index: a simple method to assess the elastic property of compression material in vivo. Dermatol Surg2005; 31(6): 625–630.
85.
PartschHClarkMMostiG, et al. Classification of compression bandages: practical aspects. Dermatol Surg2008; 34(5): 600–609.
86.
MostiG.Stiffness of compression devices. Veins Lymphat2013; 2(1): 1–2.
87.
LiuRLaoTTLittleTJ, et al. Can heterogeneous compression textile design reshape skin pressures? A fundamental study. Textile Res J2018; 88(17): 1915–1930.
88.
PartschH.The use of pressure change on standing as a surrogate measure of the stiffness of a compression bandage. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2005; 30(4): 415–421.
89.
JüngerMLadwigABohbotS, et al. Comparison of interface pressures of three compression bandaging systems used on healthy volunteers. J Wound Care2009; 18(11): 474, 476–480.
90.
LarsenAMFuttrupI.Watch the pressure – it drops!EWMA J2004; 4(2): 8–12.
91.
PatrickKDonovanL.Test-retest reliability of the Tekscan® F-Scan® 7 in-shoe plantar pressure system during treadmill walking in healthy recreationally active individuals. Sports Biomech2018; 17(1): 83–97.
