Comparison of a nonpneumatic device to four currently available intermittent pneumatic compression devices on common femoral blood flow dynamics

Effects of Continuous Graduated Pneumatic Compression and Intermittent Pneumatic Compression on Lower Limb Hemodynamics for VTE Prophylaxis in Arthroplasty

OBJECTIVE

Intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) is considered the standard of care for preventing venous thromboembolism (VTE) in the hospital setting. However, its widespread adoption after hospitalization has been limited due to its shortcomings in obstruction of venous valves and blood reflux. The objective of this study is to compare the effects of continuous graduated pneumatic compression (CGPC), a new device with a novel mechanism, and IPC on lower hemodynamics and the incidence of VTE in patients undergoing arthroplasty.

METHODS

We randomized 123 participants undergoing knee arthroplasty to receive either IPC or CGPC from June 2022 through August 2023. An experienced sonographer used a Doppler ultrasound scanner to obtain hemodynamic indicators of venous blood. The primary outcome was the blood velocity of the femoral vein measured by a Doppler scanner. Secondary outcomes included the hemodynamic of the femoral vein and popliteal vein, quality of life at discharge and 30 days after surgery, symptomatic and asymptomatic VTE up to 30 days, and adverse events related to the IPC and CGPC device. For statistical analyses, Student's t-test, analysis of covariance, and the Mann-Whitney U test were used. Statistical significance was indicated with p < 0.05.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in femoral vein velocity between the IPC and CGPC groups. However, CGPC demonstrated a significant increase in femoral vein flow compared to the IPC group, with a median (interquartile) increasing from 158.9 (122.9, 204.3) to 265.6 (203.3, 326.8) mL/min in the CGPC group and from 139.0 (103.3, 175.9) to 189.6 (161.4, 270.8) mL/min in the IPC group (p < 0.001). Similar trends were observed in popliteal vein measurements. The differences between the two groups were similar in terms of quality of life, incidence of VTE, and adverse events.

CONCLUSION

The CGPC device provides a substantial increase in blood flow compared to the IPC device. Its safety and effectiveness have been preliminarily validated. The CGPC device presents a promising alternative for VTE prophylaxis in arthroplasty.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (registration number: ChiCTR2300078201).

Evaluation of a Novel Mechanical Compression Device

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading preventable cause of death in hospitalized patients. Current intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) devices used to provide external mechanical compression for VTE prevention are associated with a multitude of clinical challenges that often result in subtherapeutic use. A comparative study was conducted of the real-world clinical use of a novel mechanical compression device (MCD) and a current IPC device.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this quality improvement project was to compare use of the novel MCD and the standard IPC device on three clinical inpatient hospital units. Comparisons were based on the following patient outcome measures: evaluation of wear time, adherence to optimal wear time, evaluation of both patient comfort and device satisfaction, and perceived impact on mobility goals. Nurses' satisfaction with the clinical usability for mobility was also measured.

METHODS

This project used a pre-post design. A convenience sample of 89 surgical patients on the three clinical study units and 63 nursing staff members were recruited for the study. Data were collected using electronic health records, MCD data records, patient surveys, and nursing staff surveys. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and independent sample t tests. In the preintervention period, data were collected using the current IPC device. Nursing staff were then trained on use of the MCD. In the postintervention period, the MCDs were used in place of the IPC devices.

RESULTS

MCD patients had significantly longer (P ≤ 0.001) wear time (mean, 19.3 hours/day) compared with IPC patients (mean, 12.9 hours/day). MCD patients also reported significantly better sleep (P = 0.04), fewer problems with sweaty legs (P ≤ 0.001), and improved assistance with mobility goals (P ≤ 0.001) than IPC patients. Nursing staff reported significantly improved accuracy of mobility documentation (P ≤ 0.001) with the MCD, but no differences in their perception of patient satisfaction with meeting mobility goals.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of the MCD device for VTE prophylaxis resulted in actual and perceived improvements from the perspective of both patients and nurses. While these results provide initial data in support of a potentially promising system, more research is needed.

Evaluation of a Novel Mechanical Venous Thromboembolism Compression Device in Trauma Patients: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the fourth most common preventable hospital-acquired complication for hospitalized trauma patients. Mechanical prophylaxis, using sequential compression or intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) devices, is recommended alongside pharmacologic prophylaxis for VTE prevention. However, compliance with device use is a barrier that reduces the effectiveness of mechanical prophylaxis.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine whether using the Movement and Compressions (MAC) system compared with an IPC device impacts compliance with mechanical VTE prophylaxis in trauma patients.

METHODS

This study used a before-and-after design with historical control at a Level II trauma center with a convenience sample of adult trauma patients admitted to the intensive care unit or acute care floor for at least 24 h. We trialed the MAC device for 2 weeks in November and December 2022 with prospective data collection. Data collection for the historical control group occurred retrospectively using patients from a point-in-time audit of IPC device compliance from August and September of 2022.

RESULTS

A total of 51 patients met inclusion criteria, with 34 patients in the IPC group and 17 patients in the MAC group. The mean (SD) prophylaxis time was 17.2 h per day (4.0) in the MAC group and 7.5 h per day (8.8) in the IPC group, which was statistically significant (p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that the MAC device can improve compliance with mechanical prophylaxis.

Achieving Noise Reduction With a Novel Lower Limb External Mechanical Compression System

Hospitals are one of the noisiest public environments in the United States, and hospital noise is associated with disrupted sleep. This study provides insights into the noise levels produced by three commonly used medical devices for mechanical deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis: the VenaFlow Elite System, the Kendall SCD Compression System, and the ArjoHuntleigh Flowtron. Noise levels produced were compared with a novel device, the RF Health MAC™ system, which was designed to provide improved comfort and noise reduction. Results suggest that future innovation in mechanical deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis should include efforts to reduce noise during operation.