Comparison between the portable pressure measuring device and PicoPress® for garment pressure measurement on hypertrophic burn scar during compression therapy

Efficacy and Safety of Pressure Therapy Alone and in Combination with Silicone in Prevention of Hypertrophic Scars: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

At present, there are many kinds of hypertrophic scar treatment methods, among which pressure therapy and silicone therapy are very common and standard therapies, but whether they are used alone or in combination is still controversial. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic review was to compare the efficacy and safety of the combination of pressure therapy and silicone therapy (PTS) with pressure therapy alone (PT) in the treatment of hypertrophic scars to provide clinicians with information so that they can make better decisions.

METHODS

Relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were collected by searching PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases to assess scar scores (The Vancouver Scar Scale, VSS; Visual Analog Scale, VAS) and adverse effects.

RESULTS

We screened 1270 articles and included 6 RCTs including 228 patients. We found that height (MD = 0.15, 95%CI 0.10-0.21, p < 0.01) and pliability (MD = 0.35, 95%CI 0.25-0.46, p <0.01) had a significant difference, these two measures showed that the PTS group was superior to the PT group. Results in other aspects, such as VSS, vascularity, pigmentation, VAS, and adverse effects were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference between PTS and PT in the overall treatment efficacy of hypertrophic scars with similar VSS and adverse effects, but PTS might have potential benefits for height and pliability. Additional studies with larger sample size and sound methodological quality are needed to confirm our conclusions. Level of Evidence IV This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Clinical Utility of the Portable Pressure-Measuring Device for Compression Garment Pressure Measurement on Hypertrophic Scars by Burn Injury during Compression Therapy

Compression therapy for burn scars can accelerate scar maturation and improve clinical symptoms (pruritus and pain). This study objectively verified the effect of pressure garment therapy in maintaining a therapeutic pressure range for hypertrophic scars. Sixty-five participants (aged 20~70 years) with partial- or full-thickness burns, Vancouver scar scale score of ≥4, and a hypertrophic scar of ≥4 cm × 4 cm were enrolled. Compression pressure was measured weekly using a portable pressure-monitoring device to regulate this pressure at 15~25 mmHg for 2 months. In the control group, the compression garment use duration and all other burn rehabilitation measures were identical except for compression monitoring. No significant difference was noted in the initial evaluations between the two groups (p > 0.05). The improvements in the amount of change in scar thickness (p = 0.03), erythema (p = 0.03), and sebum (p = 0.02) were significantly more in the pressure monitoring group than in the control group. No significant differences were noted in melanin levels, trans-epidermal water loss, or changes measured using the Cutometer® between the two groups. The efficacy of compression garment therapy for burn-related hypertrophic scars can be improved using a pressure-monitoring device to maintain the therapeutic range.

Fibre Bragg Grating Based Interface Pressure Sensor for Compression Therapy

Compression therapy is widely used as the gold standard for management of chronic venous insufficiency and venous leg ulcers, and the amount of pressure applied during the compression therapy is crucial in supporting healing. A fibre optic pressure sensor using Fibre Bragg Gratings (FBGs) is developed in this paper to measure sub-bandage pressure whilst removing cross-sensitivity due to strain in the fibre and temperature. The interface pressure is measured by an FBG encapsulated in a polymer and housed in a textile to minimise discomfort for the patient. The repeatability of a manual fabrication process is investigated by fabricating and calibrating ten sensors. A customized calibration setup consisting of a programmable translation stage and a weighing scale gives sensitivities in the range 0.4–1.5 pm/mmHg (2.6–11.3 pm/kPa). An alternative calibration method using a rigid plastic cylinder and a blood pressure cuff is also demonstrated. Investigations are performed with the sensor under a compression bandage on a phantom leg to test the response of the sensor to changing pressures in static situations. Measurements are taken on a human subject to demonstrate changes in interface pressure under a compression bandage during motion to mimic a clinical application. These results are compared to the current gold standard medical sensor using a Bland–Altman analysis, with a median bias ranging from −4.6 to −20.4 mmHg, upper limit of agreement (LOA) from −13.5 to 2.7 mmHg and lower LOA from −32.4 to −7.7 mmHg. The sensor has the potential to be used as a training tool for nurses and can be left in situ to monitor bandage pressure during compression therapy.