VenUS I: a randomised controlled trial of two types of bandage for treating venous leg ulcers

A survey of NHS nurses' delivery of treatments to prevent recurrence of venous leg ulcers

Preventing recurrence of venous leg ulcers can be achieved through strongest tolerated compression and endo-venous ablation surgery, but it is not clear how often this is done in practice. This study explores (1) nurses' awareness of strongest tolerated compression and endo-venous ablation surgery as prophylactic treatments for venous leg ulcer, (2) how often these treatments are offered, and (3) assessment of the barriers and enablers to deploying those treatments using the capabilities, opportunities and motivations model of behaviour change. An online cross-sectional survey was conducted among nurses who treat and manage venous leg ulcers across the United Kingdom. Data were analysed descriptively using within-participants ANOVA, within-participants MANOVA and multiple linear regression. We received 96 questionnaire responses. All the respondents reported that they were aware of strongest compression to prevent recurrence while 87.5% reported they were aware of endo-venous ablation surgery for recurrence prevention. Nurses' capabilities, opportunities, and motivations to offer the strongest tolerated compression were significantly greater when offering the strongest compression compared with referring to vascular surgery. Both preventative treatments were associated with marked deficits in opportunities (social and physical) and automatic motivation. Interventions targeted at increasing nurses' opportunities and boosting their motivation are needed to support the delivery of both preventive treatments. Further research is required to gain in-depth understanding of those barriers and enablers to identify candidate behaviour change techniques.

Effect of Unna's boot on venous ulcer healing: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the effect of Unna's Boot on the healing of venous ulcers compared to other therapies.

METHODS

Systematic Review carried out in the databases Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Latin American and Caribbean Literature in Health Sciences, and grey literature. Population - adult patients with venous ulcers; Intervention- Unna's Boot (UB); Control - other compression therapies (CT); Outcome- healing; Designs- randomized clinical trial, cohort study, and case control, published from 2001 to 2024. The effect of the intervention, risk of bias, and quality of evidence were evaluated. Registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021290077).

RESULTS

A total of 39 studies were included, with 5.151 patients. The majority (71.8%) were randomized controlled trials (RCT). UB was used as intervention/control in eight studies. When comparing CTs, only 1 study with UB showed a superior effect (p < .001) in healing, compared with high compression elastic bandage. In the quality of evidence analysis, 27 studies were assessed as having a high risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

No superiority of UB was found in the healing of venous ulcers when compared to other CTs.

The use of PICO™ single-use negative pressure wound therapy in the community settings

The prevalence and incidence of wounds is predicted to rise due to an ageing population, that is also likely to have an increasing number of comorbidities (Dowsett et al, 2017). This trend will invariably result in increased costs to the NHS. The estimated annual cost of wound management in 2017/2018 was £8.3 billion. The cost of managing 70% of wounds which healed was £2.7 billion while it cost £5.6 billion managing only 30% of unhealed wounds (Guest et al, 2020). In view of these figures, it is important that health professionals (HPs) recognise wounds that are not progressing to healing at an early stage and implement all available treatment modalities to ensure that the wound does not become non-healing or stalled. Therefore, this article defines non-healing wounds, how to identify wounds at risk of becoming non-healing and the timely implementation of advanced treatment modalities, such as single use negative pressure wound therapy (sNPWT).

Compression for preventing recurrence of venous ulcers

BACKGROUND

Up to 1% of adults will have a leg ulcer at some time. Most leg ulcers are venous in origin and are caused by high pressure in the veins due to blockage or damaged valves. Venous ulcer prevention and treatment typically involves the application of compression bandages/stockings to improve venous return and thus reduce pressure in the legs. Other treatment options involve removing or repairing veins. Most venous ulcers heal with compression therapy, but ulcer recurrence is common. For this reason, clinical guidelines recommend that people continue with compression treatment after their ulcer has healed. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2000 and last updated in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of compression (socks, stockings, tights, bandages) for preventing recurrence of venous leg ulcers.

SEARCH METHODS

In August 2023, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two ongoing trials registries. We also scanned the reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews and health technology reports. There were no restrictions on language, date of publication, or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated compression bandages or hosiery for preventing the recurrence of venous ulcers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. Our primary outcome was reulceration (ulcer recurrence anywhere on the treated leg). Our secondary outcomes included duration of reulceration episodes, proportion of follow-up without ulcers, ulceration on the contralateral leg, noncompliance with compression therapy, comfort, and adverse effects. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

We included eight studies (1995 participants), which were published between 1995 and 2019. The median study sample size was 249 participants. The studies evaluated different classes of compression (UK class 2 or 3 and European (EU) class 1, 2, or 3). Duration of follow-up ranged from six months to 10 years. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for risk of bias (lack of blinding), imprecision, and indirectness. EU class 3 compression stockings may reduce reulceration compared with no compression over six months (risk ratio (RR) 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 0.76; 1 study, 153 participants; low-certainty evidence). EU class 1 compression stockings compared with EU class 2 compression stockings may have little or no effect on reulceration over 12 months (RR 1.70, 95% CI 0.67 to 4.32; 1 study, 99 participants; low-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference in rates of noncompliance over 12 months between people using EU class 1 stockings and people using EU class 2 stockings (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.40 to 3.75; 1 study, 99 participants; low-certainty evidence). UK class 2 hosiery compared with UK class 3 hosiery may be associated with a higher risk of reulceration over 18 months to 10 years (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.26 to 1.91; 5 studies, 1314 participants; low-certainty evidence). People who use UK class 2 hosiery may be more compliant with compression treatment than people who use UK class 3 hosiery over 18 months to 10 years (RR for noncompliance 0.69, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.99; 5 studies, 1372 participants; low-certainty evidence). There may be little or no difference between Scholl UK class 2 compression stockings and Medi UK class 2 compression stockings in terms of reulceration (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.28; 1 study, 166 participants; low-certainty evidence) and noncompliance (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.84.1 to 12; 1 study, 166 participants; low-certainty evidence) over 18 months. No studies compared different lengths of compression (e.g. below-knee versus above-knee), and no studies measured duration of reulceration episodes, ulceration on the contralateral leg, proportion of follow-up without ulcers, comfort, or adverse effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compression with EU class 3 compression stockings may reduce reulceration compared with no compression over six months. Use of EU class 1 compression stockings compared with EU class 2 compression stockings may result in little or no difference in reulceration and noncompliance over 12 months. UK class 3 compression hosiery may reduce reulceration compared with UK class 2 compression hosiery; however, higher compression may lead to lower compliance. There may be little to no difference between Scholl and Medi UK class 2 compression stockings in terms of reulceration and noncompliance. There was no information on duration of reulceration episodes, ulceration on the contralateral leg, proportion of follow-up without ulcers, comfort, or adverse effects. More research is needed to investigate acceptable modes of long-term compression therapy for people at risk of recurrent venous ulceration. Future trials should consider interventions to improve compliance with compression treatment, as higher compression may result in lower rates of reulceration.

A systematic review of the impact of compression therapy on quality of life and pain among people with a venous leg ulcer

AIM

To gain a greater understanding of how compression therapy affects quality of life, this systematic review appraised existing published studies measuring the impact of compression therapy on health quality of life (HRQoL), and pain, among people with venous leg ulcers (VLU).

METHOD

Five databases were searched, and two authors extracted data and appraised the quality of selected papers using the RevMan risk of bias tool. Due to heterogeneity in the types of compression and instruments used to evaluate HRQoL, meta-analysis was not appropriate; thus, a narrative synthesis of findings was undertaken.

RESULTS

Ten studies were included, 9 RCTs and one before-after study. The studies employed nine different HRQoL tools to measure the impact of a variety of compression therapy systems, with or without an additional exercise programme, versus other compression systems or usual care, and the results are mixed. With the use of the Cardiff Cardiff Wound Impact Schedule, the SF-8 and the SF-12, study authors found no differences in QoL scores between the study groups. This is similar to one study using QUALYs (Iglesias et al., 2004). Conversely, for studies using EuroQol-5D, VEINES-QOL, SF-36 and CIVIQ-20 differences in QoL scores between the study groups were noted, in favour of the study intervention groups. Two further studies using QUALYs found results that favoured a two-layer cohesive compression bandage and the TLCCB group, respectively. Results for the five studies that assessed pain are also mixed, with one study finding no difference between study groups, one finding that pain increased over the study period and three studies finding that pain reduced in the intervention groups. All studies were assessed as being at risk of bias in one or more domains.

CONCLUSION

Results were varied, reflecting uncertainty in determining the impact of compression therapy on quality of life and pain among people with a venous leg ulcer. The heterogeneity of the compression systems and the measures used to evaluate HRQoL make it a challenge to interpret the overall evidence. Further studies should strive for homogeneity in design, interventions and comparators to enhance both internal and external validity.

Análise de custo-efetividade do tratamento com terapia compressiva na cicatrização de úlceras venosas

Objetivo: analisar a custo-efetividade e calcular a razão de custoefetividade incremental do tratamento compressivo multicamadas em relação ao inelástico (bota de Unna e curto estiramento) de acordo com a literatura atual. Método: estudo quantitativo sobre custo-efetividade por meio de modelagem com auxílio do software TreeAge® para a construção da árvore de decisão. Os pressupostos anunciados foram obtidos pelo uso de dados secundários de literatura para estimativa do custo e efetividade dos parâmetros assumidos. Para tal, foi realizada uma revisão sistemática de literatura com metanálise. Resultados: a árvore de decisão, após Roll Back mostrou que a terapia multicamadas dominou as alternativas no caso-base, representando custo intermediário por aplicação, porém, com a maior efetividade. O gráfico da análise de custo-efetividade também mostrou uma dominância estendida da bota de Unna em relação à bandagem de curto estiramento. A análise de sensibilidade mostrou que a bandagem multicamadas permanece como alternativa mais custo-efetiva, dentro do limiar de disposição para pagar. Conclusão: a alternativa com maior custo-efetividade foi a bandagem multicamadas, considerada padrão ouro na literatura. A segunda alternativa mais custo-efetiva foi a bota de Unna, terapia mais utilizada no Brasil.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of the treatment with compressive therapy in the healing of venous ulcers

Objective: to analyze the cost-effectiveness and calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of multilayer compressive treatment in relation to inelastic (Unna boot and short stretch) therapy according to the current literature. Method: quantitative study about cost-effectiveness through modeling with the aid of TreeAge® software for construction of the decision tree. The anticipated assumptions were obtained by using secondary literature data to estimate the cost and effectiveness of the assumed parameters. A systematic literature review with meta-analysis was performed for this end. Results: the decision tree after Roll Back showed that the multilayer therapy dominated the alternatives in the base case, representing an intermediate cost per application, although with the highest effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness analysis graph also showed extended dominance of the Unna boot in relation to the short stretch bandage. The sensitivity analysis showed that multilayer bandage remains a more cost-effective alternative, within the threshold of willingness to pay. Conclusion: the most cost-effective alternative was multilayer bandage, considered the gold standard in the literature. The second most cost-effective alternative was the Unna boot, the most used therapy in Brazil.

The evolution of leg ulcer guidelines and recommendations

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines aim to consolidate and incorporate the latest evidence and opinion to improve patient outcomes and reduce variations in practice.

AIMS AND METHODS

This article will examine the evolution of clinical guidelines and recommendations in leg ulcer assessment and management, from the seminal Royal College of Nursing clinical guideline (1998) to the current Leg Ulcer Recommendations from the National Wound Care Strategy Program (2023). The evolving definitions of leg ulcers will be discussed, as well as the multidisciplinary approach needed to manage the underlying aetiology of this condition.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

A national appetite for improving leg ulcer assessment and treatment, is being informed by clinical guidelines and recommendations. The cornerstones of assessment and management remain constant, although some fundamental elements around ankle brachial pressure index ranges, historically used to aid diagnosis of leg ulcer aetiology, have been omitted in the recent recommendations.

Endovenous ablation for venous leg ulcers

BACKGROUND

Venous leg ulcers (VLUs) are a serious manifestation of chronic venous disease affecting up to 3% of the adult population. This typically recalcitrant and recurring condition significantly impairs quality of life, and its treatment places a heavy financial burden upon healthcare systems. The longstanding mainstay treatment for VLUs is compression therapy. Surgical removal of incompetent veins reduces the risk of ulcer recurrence. However, open surgery is an unpopular option amongst people with VLU, and many people are unsuitable for it. The efficacy of the newer, minimally-invasive endovenous techniques has been established in uncomplicated superficial venous disease, and these techniques can also be used in the management of VLU. When used with compression, endovenous ablation aims to further reduce pressure in the veins of the leg, which may impact ulcer healing.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of superficial endovenous ablation on the healing and recurrence of venous leg ulcers and the quality of life of people with venous ulcer disease.

SEARCH METHODS

In April 2022 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scrutinised reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions on the language of publication, but there was a restriction on publication year from 1998 to April 2022 as superficial endovenous ablation is a comparatively new technology.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing endovenous ablative techniques with compression versus compression therapy alone for the treatment of VLU were eligible for inclusion. Studies needed to have assessed at least one of the following primary review outcomes related to objective measures of ulcer healing such as: proportion of ulcers healed at a given time point; time to complete healing; change in ulcer size; proportion of ulcers recurring over a given time period or at a specific point; or ulcer-free days. Secondary outcomes of interest were patient-reported quality of life, economic data and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed studies for eligibility, extracted data, carried out risk of bias assessment using the Cochrane RoB 1 tool, and assessed GRADE certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

The previous version of this review found no RCTs meeting the inclusion criteria. In this update, we identified two eligible RCTs and included them in a meta-analysis. There was a total of 506 participants with an active VLU, with mean durations of 3.1 months ± 1.1 months in the EVRA trial and 60.5 months ± 96.4 months in the VUERT trial. Both trials randomised participants to endovenous treatment and compression or compression alone, however the compression alone group in the EVRA trial received deferred endovenous treatment (after ulcer healing or from six months). There is high-certainty evidence that combined endovenous ablation and compression compared with compression therapy alone, or compression with deferred endovenous treatment, improves time to complete ulcer healing (pooled hazard ratio (HR) 1.41, 95% CI 1.36 to 1.47; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 466 participants). There is moderate-certainty evidence that the proportion of ulcers healed at 90 days is probably higher with combined endovenous ablation and compression compared with compression therapy alone or compression with deferred endovenous treatment (risk ratio (RR) 1.14, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.30; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 466 participants). There is low-certainty evidence showing an unclear effect on ulcer recurrence at one year in people with healed ulcers with combined endovenous treatment and compression when compared with compression alone or compression with deferred endovenous treatment (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.48; I2 = 78%; 2 studies, 460 participants). There is also low-certainty evidence that the median number of ulcer-free days at one year may not differ (306 (interquartile range (IQR) 240 to 328) days versus 278 (IQR 175 to 324) days) following combined endovenous treatment and compression when compared with compression and deferred endovenous treatment; (1 study, 450 participants). There is low-certainty evidence of an unclear effect in rates of thromboembolism between groups (RR 2.02, 95% CI 0.51 to 7.97; I2 = 78%, 2 studies, 506 participants). The addition of endovenous ablation to compression is probably cost-effective at one year (99% probability at GBP 20,000/QALY; 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Endovenous ablation of superficial venous incompetence in combination with compression improves leg ulcer healing when compared with compression alone. This conclusion is based on high-certainty evidence. There is moderate-certainty evidence to suggest that it is probably cost-effective at one year and low certainty evidence of unclear effects on recurrence and complications. Further research is needed to explore the additional benefit of endovenous ablation in ulcers of greater than six months duration and the optimal modality of endovenous ablation.

A randomised controlled trial of compression therapies for the treatment of venous leg ulcers (VenUS 6): study protocol for a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel-group, three-arm randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Venous leg ulcer(s) are common, recurring, open wounds on the lower leg, resulting from diseased or damaged leg veins impairing blood flow. Wound healing is the primary treatment aim for venous leg ulceration, alongside the management of pain, wound exudate and infection. Full (high) compression therapy delivering 40 mmHg of pressure at the ankle is the recommended first-line treatment for venous leg ulcers. There are several different forms of compression therapy available including wraps, two-layer hosiery, and two-layer or four-layer bandages. There is good evidence for the clinical and cost-effectiveness of four-layer bandage and two-layer hosiery but more limited evidence for other treatments (two-layer bandage and compression wraps). Robust evidence is required to compare clinical and cost-effectiveness of these and to investigate which is the best compression treatment for reducing time to healing of venous leg ulcers whilst offering value for money. VenUS 6 will therefore investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of evidence-based compression, two-layer bandage and compression wraps for time to healing of venous leg ulcers.

METHODS

VenUS 6 is a pragmatic, multi-centre, three-arm, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial. Adult patients with a venous leg ulcer will be randomised to receive (1) compression wraps, (2) two-layer bandage or (3) evidence-based compression (two-layer hosiery or four-layer bandage). Participants will be followed up for between 4 and 12 months. The primary outcome will be time to healing (full epithelial cover in the absence of a scab) in days since randomisation. Secondary outcomes will include key clinical events (e.g. healing of the reference leg, ulcer recurrence, ulcer/skin deterioration, amputation, admission/discharge, surgery to close/remove incompetent superficial veins, infection or death), treatment changes, adherence and ease of use, ulcer related pain, health-related quality of life and resource use.

DISCUSSION

VenUS 6 will provide robust evidence on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the different forms of compression therapies for venous leg ulceration. VenUS 6 opened to recruitment in January 2021 and is currently recruiting across 30 participating centres.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN67321719 . Prospectively registered on 14 September 2020.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of the treatment with compressive therapy in the healing of venous ulcers

OBJECTIVE

to analyze the cost-effectiveness and calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of multilayer compressive treatment in relation to inelastic (Unna boot and short stretch) therapy according to the current literature.

METHOD

quantitative study about cost-effectiveness through modeling with the aid of TreeAge® software for construction of the decision tree. The anticipated assumptions were obtained by using secondary literature data to estimate the cost and effectiveness of the assumed parameters. A systematic literature review with meta-analysis was performed for this end.

RESULTS

the decision tree after Roll Back showed that the multilayer therapy dominated the alternatives in the base case, representing an intermediate cost per application, although with the highest effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness analysis graph also showed extended dominance of the Unna boot in relation to the short stretch bandage. The sensitivity analysis showed that multilayer bandage remains a more cost-effective alternative, within the threshold of willingness to pay.

CONCLUSION

the most cost-effective alternative was multilayer bandage, considered the gold standard in the literature. The second most cost-effective alternative was the Unna boot, the most used therapy in Brazil.

Effect of four-layer dressing on the microbiological profile of venous leg ulcer

OBJECTIVE

Venous leg ulcer (VLU) is a chronic disease and has periods of exacerbation and remission. Various bandage systems-single-layered, double-layered and multiple-layered with elastic and non-elastic components-have been developed. The requirement for sustained pressure brought about the introduction of the four-layer bandage. We studied the bacteriology of VLUs and the effect of four-layer bandages on their healing.

METHOD

Clinical details of all patients, with wound size measurement by gauze piece, wax paper and scale, were recorded. The wounds were initially debrided and photographic records of all patients were maintained. Patients were followed up every week, when the dressings and four-layer bandages were changed.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients were recruited to the study with four patients having bilateral disease and so a total of 64 VLUs were evaluated. Of these, 60 (93.8%) healed completely, one (1.6%) healed partially and three (4.7%) did not heal. After excluding the four VLUs that did not fully heal, 10 (16.7%) had recurrence while 50 (83.3%) had no recurrence in the follow-up period, which lasted for one year. During the first visit (baseline), meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was isolated in 29 (45.31%) VLUs and Pseudomonas spp. in 20 (31.25%) VLUs. With subsequent dressing, the VLU size decreased and the culture of the VLU was sterile from the third culture onwards in 45 cases. There was a significant correlation (p<0.001) between VLU size and the number of dressings.

CONCLUSION

Compression therapy is the mainstay of treatment of VLU, with rapid healing and improvement in bacteriological profile. Compression in the range of 30-40mmHg is the most effective treatment for uncomplicated VLUs with adequate arterial competency.

Hospital clinicians' perspectives of using compression therapy on venous leg ulcers: a systematic qualitative review

Venous leg ulcer treatment is frequently discontinued in hospitals in contravention of national guidance, significantly affecting patient outcomes and increasing NHS costs.

AIM

To identify, from the published literature, reasons for variable implementation.

METHOD

Systematic review with narrative synthesis, including full papers in English with empirical qualitative data. Synonyms for venous leg ulcer, compression therapy and secondary care were searched across a range of health-related databases. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist determined study quality, and meta-ethnography was used for data synthesis.

RESULTS

7040 titles and abstracts and 41 full-text papers were screened with four papers selected. Three key themes were generated: educational needs surrounding implementation of compression therapy, patient factors regarding adherence and organisational resources including availability of appropriate equipment and trained staff.

CONCLUSION

Barriers at the ward level were identified. There is a need to better understand why hospitals are not addressing them.

A new compression system for treatment of venous leg ulcers: a prospective, single-arm, clinical trial (FREEDOM)

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of a new multicomponent compression system in one bandage for the local treatment of patients with venous leg ulcers (VLUs).

METHOD

This was an international, prospective, non-comparative, clinical trial, conducted in France and Germany. Eligible participants had a VLU with a wound area of 2-20cm², lasting for a maximum of 24 months. For a period of 6 weeks, patients were treated with a new multicomponent compression system in one bandage which was worn day and night, providing high working pressure and moderate resting pressure (UrgoK1). Clinical assessments, wound measurement and photographs were planned at weeks 1, 2, 4 and 6. The primary endpoint was the relative wound area reduction (RWAR) after 6 weeks of treatment. Secondary endpoints included wound closure rate, oedema resolution, change in patient's health-related quality of life (HRQoL), acceptability, adherence to the compression therapy, local tolerance, and physician's overall satisfaction with the evaluated compression system.

RESULTS

A cohort of 52 patients (52% female, mean age 75.4±13.0 years) with VLUs, including oedema in 58% of cases, were recruited from 22 centres. At baseline, 42 patients had already been treated with a different compression system. VLUs had been present for 5.6±4.9 months and had a mean area of 5.7±4.3cm². After 6 weeks of treatment, a median RWAR of 91% (interquartile range: 39.4; 100.0) was achieved. Wound closure was reported in 35% of patients. A RWAR ≥40% at week 4, predictive of wound healing at 12 weeks, was achieved in 62% of patients. At the final visit, oedema present at baseline was resolved in 57% of patients. Substantial improvements in the HRQoL of the patients were reported with a decrease of the pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression dimensions. Comfort in wearing the evaluated system was reported as 'very good' or 'good' by 79% of patients, resulting in a high patient adherence to compression therapy. Compared to previous compression systems, half of the patients reported more ease in wearing shoes, and greater satisfaction and comfort with this new system. Nine non-serious adverse events related to the device or its procedure occurred in seven patients. At the final visit, the majority of the physicians were 'very satisfied' or 'satisfied' with the new compression system overall.

CONCLUSION

The new multicomponent compression system in one bandage has been shown to promote rapid healing of VLUs, reduce oedema, improve HRQoL and to be well tolerated and accepted. It appears to be a viable alternative to existing compression systems.

A meta-review of the impact of compression therapy on venous leg ulcer healing

This meta-review aimed to appraise and synthesise findings from existing systematic reviews that measured the impact of compression therapy on venous leg ulcers healing. We searched five databases to identify potential papers; three authors extracted data, and a fourth author adjudicated the findings. The AMSTAR-2 tool was used for quality appraisal and the certainty of the evidence was appraised using GRADEpro. Data analysis was undertaken using RevMan. We identified 12 systematic reviews published between 1997 and 2021. AMSTAR-2 assessment identified three as high quality, five as moderate quality, and four as low quality. Seven comparisons were reported, with a meta-analysis undertaken for five of these comparisons: compression vs no compression (risk ratio [RR]: 1.55; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-1.78; P < .00001; moderate-certainty evidence); elastic compression vs inelastic compression (RR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.96-1.08; P < .61 moderate-certainty evidence); four layer vs <four-layer bandage systems (RR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.82-1.40; P < .63; moderate-certainty evidence); comparison between different four-layer bandage systems (RR: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.93-1.25; P = .34; moderate-certainty evidence); compression bandage vs compression stocking (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.87-1.03; P = .18; moderate-certainty evidence). The main conclusion from this review is that there is a statistically significant difference in healing rates when compression is used compared with no compression, with moderate-certainty evidence. Otherwise, there is no statistically different difference in healing rates using elastic compression vs inelastic compression, four layer vs <four-layer bandage systems, different four-layer bandage systems, or compression bandages vs compression stockings.

A point prevalence audit of inpatients with leg ulcers eligible for compression therapy in a large university NHS hospital

OBJECTIVE

Compression therapy is the mainstay of treatment for venous leg ulceration. Several studies have evaluated leg ulcer management and compression in the community. However, little is known about the leg ulcer population and use of compression therapy in the hospital setting, where it is not often part of inpatient care. This study aimed to evaluate the proportion of inpatients with leg ulceration eligible for compression therapy.

METHOD

A point prevalence audit was undertaken using three methods: patient electronic live report; a leg ulcer audit form; and an electronic record search. The following data were retrieved: patient age, sex, primary reason for admission, diabetes, mobility status, history of dementia, Clinical Frailty Scale score and presence of oedema. Ankle-brachial pressure index was measured to determine patients' eligibility for compression therapy.

RESULTS

The audit identified 80/931 (8.5%) inpatients as having confirmed, active leg ulceration. A total of 36/80 (45%) inpatients were assessed for eligibility for compression, of whom 25/36 (69.4%) were eligible for full compression, 2/36 (5.6%) reduced compression and 9/36 (25%) were not eligible for compression therapy.

CONCLUSION

The audit demonstrated that a significant proportion of hospital inpatients with leg ulcers were eligible for compression therapy and that this patient population were heterogenous in terms of comorbidity profile, mobility, frailty and dementia, among other factors. Further research is required to explore the most feasible and effective compression options for inpatients with leg ulcers.

Compression bandages or stockings versus no compression for treating venous leg ulcers

BACKGROUND

Leg ulcers are open skin wounds on the lower leg that can last weeks, months or even years. Most leg ulcers are the result of venous diseases. First-line treatment options often include the use of compression bandages or stockings.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of using compression bandages or stockings, compared with no compression, on the healing of venous leg ulcers in any setting and population.

SEARCH METHODS

In June 2020 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations), Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions by language, date of publication or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that compared any types of compression bandages or stockings with no compression in participants with venous leg ulcers in any setting.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently assessed studies using predetermined inclusion criteria. We carried out data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. We assessed the certainty of the evidence according to GRADE methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 studies (1391 participants) in the review. Most studies were small (median study sample size: 51 participants). Participants were recruited from acute-care settings, outpatient settings and community settings, and a large proportion (65.9%; 917/1391) of participants had a confirmed history or clinical evidence of chronic venous disease, a confirmed cause of chronic venous insufficiency, or an ankle pressure/brachial pressure ratio of greater than 0.8 or 0.9. The average age of participants ranged from 58.0 to 76.5 years (median: 70.1 years). The average duration of their leg ulcers ranged from 9.0 weeks to 31.6 months (median: 22.0 months), and a large proportion of participants (64.8%; 901/1391) had ulcers with an area between 5 and 20 cm2. Studies had a median follow-up of 12 weeks. Compression bandages or stockings applied included short-stretch bandage, four-layer compression bandage, and Unna's boot (a type of inelastic gauze bandage impregnated with zinc oxide), and comparator groups used included 'usual care', pharmacological treatment, a variety of dressings, and a variety of treatments where some participants received compression (but it was not the norm). Of the 14 included studies, 10 (71.4%) presented findings which we consider to be at high overall risk of bias. Primary outcomes There is moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded once for risk of bias) (1) that there is probably a shorter time to complete healing of venous leg ulcers in people wearing compression bandages or stockings compared with those not wearing compression (pooled hazard ratio for time-to-complete healing 2.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.52 to 3.10; I2 = 59%; 5 studies, 733 participants); and (2) that people treated using compression bandages or stockings are more likely to experience complete ulcer healing within 12 months compared with people with no compression (10 studies, 1215 participants): risk ratio for complete healing 1.77, 95% CI 1.41 to 2.21; I2 = 65% (8 studies with analysable data, 1120 participants); synthesis without meta-analysis suggests more completely-healed ulcers in compression bandages or stockings than in no compression (2 studies without analysable data, 95 participants). It is uncertain whether there is any difference in rates of adverse events between using compression bandages or stockings and no compression (very low-certainty evidence; 3 studies, 585 participants). Secondary outcomes Moderate-certainty evidence suggests that people using compression bandages or stockings probably have a lower mean pain score than those not using compression (four studies with 859 participants and another study with 69 ulcers): pooled mean difference -1.39, 95% CI -1.79 to -0.98; I2 = 65% (two studies with 426 participants and another study with 69 ulcers having analysable data); synthesis without meta-analysis suggests a reduction in leg ulcer pain in compression bandages or stockings, compared with no compression (two studies without analysable data, 433 participants). Compression bandages or stockings versus no compression may improve disease-specific quality of life, but not all aspects of general health status during the follow-up of 12 weeks to 12 months (four studies with 859 participants; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain if the use of compression bandages or stockings is more cost-effective than not using them (three studies with 486 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

If using compression bandages or stockings, people with venous leg ulcers probably experience complete wound healing more quickly, and more people have wounds completely healed. The use of compression bandages or stockings probably reduces pain and may improve disease-specific quality of life. There is uncertainty about adverse effects, and cost effectiveness. Future research should focus on comparing alternative bandages and stockings with the primary endpoint of time to complete wound healing alongside adverse events including pain score, and health-related quality of life, and should incorporate cost-effectiveness analysis where possible. Future studies should adhere to international standards of trial conduct and reporting.

A randomised controlled clinical trial comparing the effectiveness of bandaging compared to the JuxtaCures™ device in the management of people with venous ulceration: Feasibility study

INTRODUCTION

The mainstay of treatment for venous ulceration remains compression therapy. Velcro Wrap devices are being increasingly used in these patients despite limited evidence. This feasibility study aimed to compare standard bandaging to the JuxtaCures™ Velcro wrap device.

METHODS

A single centre, unblinded RCT compared participants with venous ulceration randomised to either the JuxtaCures™ device or short stretch bandaging. Participants were followed up for 26 weeks.

RESULTS

160 participants were screened with 40 randomised. 3 participants in bandaging and 1 in JuxtaCures™ didn't complete the study. 60% in JuxtaCures™ healed v 55% in bandaging despite larger ulcers in the JuxtaCures™ arm (9.33 cm² v 6.97 cm²). There was no significant difference in time to healing (12.17 v 13.64 weeks). JuxtaCures™ showed improved ulcer reduction for those that didn't heal (14.91-5.00 cm² v 14.20-8.62 cm²; P = 0.06). JuxtaCures™ had more consistent sub-bandage pressure dropping from 39-36 mmHg versus 41-25 mmHg in bandaging between application and removal (P < 0.001). Quality of life (EQ5D) was improved in JuxtaCures at 3 months (mean difference 0.14, p = 0.04), but not at 1 and 6 months, or in disease specific quality of life. Cost was lower in JuxtaCures™ £842.47 v £1064.68. Duration of appointment was significantly shorter in JuxtaCures™ (41 minutes v 53 minutes; P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

This study has shown the feasibility and necessity of running a multicentre trial to evaluate the use of Velcro wrap devices for venous ulceration. It highlights the potential benefits of more consistent pressure, increased self-care, and potential with regards to ulcer healing, cost, nursing resource and quality of life.

Wool-derived keratin dressings versus usual care dressings for treatment of slow healing venous leg ulceration: a randomised controlled trial (Keratin4VLU)

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of a keratin dressing for treating slow-to-heal venous leg ulcers (VLU) on VLU healing.

DESIGN

Pragmatic parallel group randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Community-dwelling participants.

PARTICIPANTS

People aged 18 or more years with VLU (either present for more than 26 weeks or ulcer area larger than 5 cm² or both).

INTERVENTION

Wool-derived keratin dressing or usual care formulary of non-medicated dressings, on a background treatment with compression.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Healing at 24 weeks based on blinded assessment of ulcer photographs. Other outcomes included time to complete healing, change in ulcer area to 24 weeks, change in health-related quality of life and incidence of adverse events.

RESULTS

We screened 1068 patients with VLU and randomised 143 participants (51.1% of target recruitment), 71 to the keratin dressing group and 72 to the usual care group.The mean age was 66.1 years (SD 15.9) and 53 participants (37.1%) were women. There were no significant differences between the groups on the primary outcome (risk difference -6.4%, 95% CI -22.5% to 9.7%), change in ulcer area (-1.9 cm², 95% CI -16.5 to 12.8 cm²), time to complete healing (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.23) or the incidence of adverse events (incidence rate ratio 1.19, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.59) in the intention-to-treat analyses. However, the direction of effect on the primary outcome was reversed in a per protocol analysis specified a priori (risk difference 6.2%, 95% CI -12.4% to 24.9%).

CONCLUSION

The effect of adding a keratin dressing to the treatment regimen for prognostically slow-to-heal VLU remains unclear.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02896725.

A comparison of inpatients with leg ulceration using published randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Leg ulcers are a significant burden and reduce patients' quality of life. In recent years, a plethora of information has been issued regarding leg ulcer management and 'the demographics of patients affected in the community. However, little is known about the leg ulcer population and how these patients should be managed in acute hospitals.

AIM

To compare the demographic data of inpatients with leg ulcers referred to the tissue viability service in a large teaching hospital with data on leg ulcer populations in acute and community settings.

METHODS

Inpatient demographic data were retrospectively obtained from electronic patient records. A literature search identified studies regarding leg ulcer populations in acute and community settings.

RESULTS

The patient population in acute settings is around 10 years older than that in community settings, with much greater levels of comorbidity and higher mortality rates.

CONCLUSION

An improved understanding of inpatients with leg ulcers would allow investigations and interventions to be targeted better, enabling evidence-based, patient-centred referral and care pathways. Further research is required to understand the aetiology and outcomes of leg ulcers for the inpatient population.

Review of adjustable velcro wrap devices for venous ulceration

Compression therapy is the mainstay of treatment for patients with venous leg ulcers. Current gold standard is 4 layer bandaging, which has a significant impact on patients comfort, ability to wear their own shoes, and quality of life, as well as taking significant time to apply, and losing compression over time. This systematic review aims to evaluate the use of Velcro wrap devices for the treatment of venous ulceration. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used to identify articles reporting the use of Velcro wrap devices in patients with venous ulceration. Sixteen articles were identified (14 case series, 1 randomised trial, and 1 audit) reporting on 192 patients. There were reports of improved time to healing, reduced cost by >50%, reduced number and duration of nursing appointments, and improved quality of life in patients in Velcro wrap devices. Although the evidence remains poor, Velcro devices have potential to improve outcomes for patients with venous ulceration and further good quality studies should be undertaken to evaluate these further.

Subfascial endoscopic perforator surgery (SEPS) for treating venous leg ulcers

BACKGROUND

Venous leg ulcers are complex, costly, and their prevalence is expected to increase as populations age. Venous congestion is a possible cause of venous leg ulcers, which subfascial endoscopic perforator surgery (SEPS) attempts to address by removing the connection between deep and superficial veins (perforator veins). The effectiveness of SEPS in the treatment of venous leg ulcers, however, is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of subfascial endoscopic perforator surgery (SEPS) for the treatment of venous leg ulcers.

SEARCH METHODS

In March 2018 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions that examined the use of SEPS independently or in combination with another intervention for the treatment of venous leg ulcers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four RCTs with a total of 322 participants. There were three different comparators: SEPS plus compression therapy versus compression therapy (two trials); SEPS versus the Linton procedure (a type of open surgery) (one trial); and SEPS plus saphenous surgery versus saphenous surgery (one trial). The age range of participants was 30 to 82, with an equal spread of male and female participants. All trials were conducted in hospital settings with varying durations of follow-up, from 18 months to 6 years. One trial included participants who had both healed and active ulcers, with the rest including only participants with active ulcers.There was the potential for reporting bias in all trials and performance bias and detection bias in three trials. Participants in the fourth trial received one of two surgical procedures, and this study was at low risk of performance bias and detection bias.SEPS + compression therapy versus compression therapy (2 studies; 208 participants)There may be an increase in the proportion of healed ulcers at 24 months in people treated with SEPS and compression therapy compared with compression therapy alone (risk ratio (RR) 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.33; 1 study; 196 participants); low-certainty evidence (downgraded twice, once for risk of bias and once for imprecision).It is uncertain whether SEPS reduces the risk of ulcer recurrence at 24 months (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.26 to 2.76; 2 studies; 208 participants); very low-certainty evidence (downgraded three times, twice for very serious imprecision and once for risk of bias).The included trials did not measure or report the following outcomes; time to complete healing, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), adverse events, pain, duration of hospitalisation, and district nursing care requirements.SEPS versus Linton approach (1 study; 39 participants)It is uncertain whether there is a difference in ulcer healing at 24 months between participants treated with SEPS and those treated with the Linton procedure (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.09; 1 study; 39 participants); very low-certainty evidence (downgraded three times, twice for very serious imprecision and once for risk of bias).It is also uncertain whether there is a difference in risk of recurrence at 60 months: (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.30; 1 study; 39 participants); very low-certainty evidence (downgraded three times, twice for very serious imprecision and once for risk of bias).The Linton procedure is possibly associated with more adverse events than SEPS (RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.60; 1 study; 39 participants); very low-certainty evidence (downgraded three times, twice for very serious imprecision and once for risk of bias).The outcomes time to complete healing, HRQOL, pain, duration of hospitalisation and district nursing care requirements were either not measured, reported or data were not available for analysis.SEPS + saphenous surgery versus saphenous surgery (1 study; 75 participants)It is uncertain whether there is a difference in ulcer healing at 12 months between participants treated with SEPS and saphenous surgery versus those treated with saphenous surgery alone (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.43; 1 study; 22 participants); very low certainty evidence (downgraded three times, twice for very serious imprecision and once for high risk of reporting bias).It is also uncertain whether there is a difference in the risk of recurrence at 12 months: (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.15 to 6.91; 1 study; 75 participants); very low certainty evidence (downgraded three times, twice for very serious imprecision and once for high risk of reporting bias).Finally, we are uncertain whether there is an increase in adverse events in the SEPS group (RR 2.05, 95% CI 0.86 to 4.90; 1 study; 75 participants); very low certainty evidence (downgraded three times, twice for very serious imprecision and once for high risk of reporting bias).The outcomes time to complete healing, HRQOL, serious adverse events, pain, duration of hospitalisation, and district nursing care requirements were either not measured, reported or data were not available for analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The role of SEPS for the treatment of venous leg ulcers remains uncertain. Only low or very low-certainty evidence was available for inclusion. Due to small sample sizes and risk of bias in the included studies, we were unable to determine the potential benefits and harms of SEPS for this purpose. Only four studies met our inclusion criteria, three were very small, and one was poorly reported. Further high-quality studies addressing the use of SEPS in venous leg ulcer management are likely to change the conclusions of this review.

AVURT: aspirin versus placebo for the treatment of venous leg ulcers - a Phase II pilot randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Venous leg ulcers (VLUs) are the most common cause of leg ulceration, affecting 1 in 100 adults. VLUs may take many months to heal (25% fail to heal). Estimated prevalence is between 1% and 3% of the elderly population. Compression is the mainstay of treatment and few additional therapies exist to improve healing. Two previous trials have indicated that low-dose aspirin, as an adjunct to standard care, may improve healing time, but these trials were insufficiently robust. Aspirin is an inexpensive, widely used medication but its safety and efficacy in the treatment of VLUs remains to be established.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective - to assess the effects of 300 mg of aspirin (daily) versus placebo on the time to healing of the reference VLU. Secondary objectives - to assess the feasibility of leading into a larger pragmatic Phase III trial and the safety of aspirin in this population.

DESIGN

A multicentred, pilot, Phase II randomised double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled efficacy trial.

SETTING

Community leg ulcer clinics or services, hospital outpatient clinics, leg ulcer clinics, tissue viability clinics and wound clinics in England, Wales and Scotland.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged ≥ 18 years with a chronic VLU (i.e. the VLU is > 6 weeks in duration or the patient has a history of VLU) and who are not regularly taking aspirin.

INTERVENTIONS

300 mg of daily oral aspirin versus placebo. All patients were offered care in accordance with Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) guidance with multicomponent compression therapy aiming to deliver 40 mmHg at the ankle when possible.

RANDOMISATION

Participants were allocated in a 1 : 1 (aspirin : placebo) ratio by the Research Pharmacy, St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, using a randomisation schedule generated in advance by the investigational medicinal product manufacturer. Randomisation was stratified according to ulcer size (≤ 5cm² or > 5cm²).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The primary outcome was time to healing of the largest eligible ulcer (reference ulcer).

FEASIBILITY RESULTS – RECRUITMENT

27 patients were recruited from eight sites over a period of 8 months. The target of 100 patients was not achieved and two sites did not recruit. Barriers to recruitment included a short recruitment window and a large proportion of participants failing to meet the eligibility criteria.

RESULTS

The average age of the 27 randomised participants (placebo, n = 13; aspirin, n = 14) was 62 years (standard deviation 13 years), and two-thirds were male (n = 18). Participants had their reference ulcer for a median of 15 months, and the median size of ulcer was 17.1 cm². There was no evidence of a difference in time to healing of the reference ulcer between groups in an adjusted analysis for log-ulcer area and duration (hazard ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 1.85; p = 0.357). One expected, related serious adverse event was recorded for a participant in the aspirin group.

LIMITATIONS

The trial under-recruited because many patients did not meet the eligibility criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no evidence that aspirin was efficacious in hastening the healing of chronic VLUs. It can be concluded that a larger Phase III (effectiveness) trial would not be feasible.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials.gov NCT02333123; European Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT) 2014-003979-39.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 22, No. 55. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Protease activity as a prognostic factor for wound healing in venous leg ulcers

BACKGROUND

Venous leg ulcers (VLUs) are a common type of complex wound that have a negative impact on people's lives and incur high costs for health services and society. It has been suggested that prolonged high levels of protease activity in the later stages of the healing of chronic wounds may be associated with delayed healing. Protease modulating treatments have been developed which seek to modulate protease activity and thereby promote healing in chronic wounds.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether protease activity is an independent prognostic factor for the healing of venous leg ulcers.

SEARCH METHODS

In February 2018, we searched the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase and CINAHL.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included prospective and retrospective longitudinal studies with any follow-up period that recruited people with VLUs and investigated whether protease activity in wound fluid was associated with future healing of VLUs. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) analysed as cohort studies, provided interventions were taken into account in the analysis, and case-control studies if there were no available cohort studies. We also included prediction model studies provided they reported separately associations of individual prognostic factors (protease activity) with healing. Studies of any type of protease or combination of proteases were eligible, including proteases from bacteria, and the prognostic factor could be examined as a continuous or categorical variable; any cut-off point was permitted. The primary outcomes were time to healing (survival analysis) and the proportion of people with ulcers completely healed; the secondary outcome was change in ulcer size/rate of wound closure. We extracted unadjusted (simple) and adjusted (multivariable) associations between the prognostic factor and healing.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion at each stage, and undertook data extraction, assessment of risk of bias and GRADE assessment. We collected association statistics where available. No study reported adjusted analyses: instead we collected unadjusted results or calculated association measures from raw data. We calculated risk ratios when both outcome and prognostic factor were dichotomous variables. When the prognostic factor was reported as continuous data and healing outcomes were dichotomous, we either performed regression analysis or analysed the impact of healing on protease levels, analysing as the standardised mean difference. When both prognostic factor and outcome were continuous data, we reported correlation coefficients or calculated them from individual participant data.We displayed all results on forest plots to give an overall visual representation. We planned to conduct meta-analyses where this was appropriate, otherwise we summarised narratively.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 19 studies comprising 21 cohorts involving 646 participants. Only 11 studies (13 cohorts, 522 participants) had data available for analysis. Of these, five were prospective cohort studies, four were RCTs and two had a type of case-control design. Follow-up time ranged from four to 36 weeks. Studies covered 10 different matrix metalloproteases (MMPs) and two serine proteases (human neutrophil elastase and urokinase-type plasminogen activators). Two studies recorded complete healing as an outcome; other studies recorded partial healing measures. There was clinical and methodological heterogeneity across studies; for example, in the definition of healing, the type of protease and its measurement, the distribution of active and bound protease species, the types of treatment and the reporting of results. Therefore, meta-analysis was not performed. No study had conducted multivariable analyses and all included evidence was of very low certainty because of the lack of adjustment for confounders, the high risk of bias for all studies except one, imprecision around the measures of association and inconsistency in the direction of association. Collectively the research indicated complete uncertainty as to the association between protease activity and VLU healing.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review identified very low validity evidence regarding any association between protease activity and VLU healing and there is complete uncertainty regarding the relationship. The review offers information for both future research and systematic review methodology.

Publicly Reported Wound Healing Rates: The Fantasy and the Reality

Significance: We compare real-world data from the U.S. Wound Registry (USWR) with randomized controlled trials and publicly reported wound outcomes and develop criteria for honest reporting of wound outcomes, a requirement of the new Quality Payment Program (QPP). Recent Advances: Because no method has existed by which wounds could be stratified according to their likelihood of healing among real-world patients, practitioners have reported fantastically high healing rates. The USWR has developed several risk-stratified wound healing quality measures for diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) and venous leg ulcers (VLUs) as part of its Qualified Clinical Data Registry (QCDR). This allows practitioners to report DFU and VLU healing rates in comparison to the likelihood of whether the wound would have healed. Critical Issues: Under the new QPP, practitioners must report at least one practice-relevant outcome measure, and it must be risk adjusted so that clinicians caring for the sickest patients do not appear to have worse outcomes than their peers. The Wound Healing Index is a validated risk-stratification method that can predict whether a DFU or VLU will heal, leveling the playing field for outcome reporting and removing the need to artificially inflate healing rates. Wound care practitioners can report the USWR DFU and VLU risk-stratified outcome measure to satisfy the quality reporting requirements of the QPP. Future Directions: Per the requirements of the QPP, the USWR will begin publicly reporting of risk-stratified healing rates once quality measure data have met the reporting standards of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Some basic rules for data censoring are proposed for public reporting of healing rates, and others are needed, which should be decided by consensus among the wound care community.

Wool-derived keratin dressings versus usual care dressings for treatment of slow-healing venous leg ulceration: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial (Keratin4VLU)

INTRODUCTION

Keratins, filament-forming proteins found in vertebrate epithelium, are downregulated in slow-healing venous leg ulcers (VLU) compared with normal-healing VLU. Laboratory and animal model research has suggested exogenous keratins increase expression of endogenous keratins. A non-randomised controlled trial of an exogenous keratin dressing reported increased healing in slow-healing VLU. To date, no randomised controlled trial has been done to verify these promising findings.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The Keratin4VLU trial is a single-blind, pragmatic, parallel group, randomised controlled trial of keratin dressings compared with usual care non-medicated dressings in patients with VLU where either (1) the ulcer area is greater than 5 cm2, (2) the ulcer has been present for more than 26 weeks or (3) both. All patients will receive compression therapy. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients with healed VLU at 24 weeks after randomisation as adjudicated by blinded review of an ulcer photograph. Secondary outcomes are time to healing, estimated change in ulcer area, change in health-related quality of life, agreement between blinded and unblinded assessors and adverse events. The analysis will be intention-to-treat on the primary and secondary outcomes (excepting health-related quality of life).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Keratin4VLU trial received ethical approval from the Northern A Health and Disability Ethics Committee. We plan to publish the results within 1 year of trial completion and will include the results on the trial registration page.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02896725; Pre-results.

Compression treatment in venous insufficiency and arterial disease

Compression therapy is one of cornerstone in the treatment of venous and lymphatic disorders.

It may be applied by means of different elastic or inelastic stockings, bandages, or other devices. Inelastic material is much more effective improving venous impaired haemodynamics than elastic material. Due to its physical properties inelastic material is able to exert a significantly higher pressure than elastic devices moving to the standing from the supine pressure; furthermore it is able to exert significantly higher pressure peaks during muscle exercise. This high pressure can overcome the intravenous pressure and cause intermittent occlusion of leg veins, restoring a kind of valve mechanism. Elastic material gives way to the muscle expansion during standing and walking and the pressure increase in these conditions is very low. Due to this low increase with muscle activity, elastic material does not exert an intermittent pressure but rather a sustained pressure not able to overcome the intravenous pressure. As a consequence, elastic material is hardly able to influence the venous diameter and its haemodynamic effects are minimal.

Compared to elastic, inelastic material is significantly more effective in reducing venous reflux, increasing venous pumping function and reducing ambulatory venous hypertension.

Compression therapy proved to be beneficial, over time, in every clinical condition from CEAP C1 to C6.

Due to their characteristics and effects, in-elastic compression needs to be applied in the acute stages of venous disorders when a strong haemodynamic effect is necessary, while elastic stockings may be used in the chronic stages to maintain the results and prevent recurrences.

A new concept in compression therapy is the inversely graduated compression pressure profile, higher over the calf than over the ankle, also named “progressive compression.” Both specially designed elastic stockings and appropriately applied bandages can exert a progressive compression which showed some interesting outcomes both in experimental and clinical settings in patients with chronic venous disorders and in athletes. Nevertheless its effectiveness in many pathological conditions (oedema treatment, venous leg ulcer, thromboprophylaxis, etc.) needs to be proved in future trials.

Low dose aspirin as adjuvant treatment for venous leg ulceration: pragmatic, randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial (Aspirin4VLU)

Objective To determine the effect of low dose aspirin on ulcer healing in patients with venous leg ulcers.Design Pragmatic, community based, parallel group, double blind, randomised controlled trial.Setting Five community nursing centres in New Zealand.Participants 251 adults with venous leg ulcers who could safely be treated with aspirin or placebo: 125 were randomised to aspirin and 126 to placebo.Interventions 150 mg oral aspirin daily or matching placebo for up to 24 weeks treatment, with compression therapy as standard background treatment.Main outcome measures The primary outcome was time to complete healing of the reference ulcer (largest ulcer if more than one ulcer was present). Secondary outcomes included proportion of participants healed, change in ulcer area, change in health related quality of life, and adverse events. Analysis was by intention to treat.Results The median number of days to healing of the reference ulcer was 77 in the aspirin group and 69 in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.64 to 1.13, P=0.25). The number of participants healed at the endpoint was 88 (70%) in the aspirin group and 101 (80%) in the placebo group (risk difference -9.8%, 95% confidence interval -20.4% to 0.9%, P=0.07). Estimated change in ulcer area was 4.1 cm² in the aspirin group and 4.8 cm² in the placebo group (mean difference -0.7 cm², 95% confidence interval -1.9 to 0.5 cm², P=0.25). 40 adverse events occurred among 29 participants in the aspirin group and 37 adverse events among 27 participants in the placebo group (incidence rate ratio 1.1, 95% confidence interval 0.7 to 1.7, P=0.71).Conclusion Our findings do not support the use of low dose aspirin as adjuvant treatment for venous leg ulcers.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02158806.

Systematic review assessing the measurement properties of patient-reported outcomes for venous leg ulcers

Background

A variety of instruments have been used to assess outcomes for patients with venous leg ulcers. This study sought to identify, evaluate and recommend the most appropriate patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) for English‐speaking patients with venous leg ulcers.

Methods

This systematic review used a two‐stage search approach. Electronic searches of major databases including MEDLINE were completed in October 2015, and then updated in July 2016. Additional studies were identified from citation checking. Study selection, data extraction and quality assessment were undertaken independently by at least two reviewers. Evaluation and summary of measurement properties of identified PROMs were done using standard and adapted study‐relevant criteria.

Results

Ten studies with data for four generic PROMS and six condition‐specific measures were identified. No generic PROM showed adequate content and criterion validity; however, the EuroQoL Five Dimensions (EQ‐5D™), Nottingham Health Profile (NHP) and 12‐item Short‐Form Health Survey (SF‐12®) had good acceptability. In general, the EQ‐5D™ showed poor responsiveness in patients with venous leg ulcers. Most condition‐specific PROMs demonstrated poor criterion and construct validity. Overall, there was some evidence of internal consistency for the Venous Leg Ulcer Quality of Life (VLU‐QoL) and the Sheffield Preference‐based Venous Ulcer questionnaire (SPVU‐5D). Test–retest reliability was satisfactory for the Venous Leg Ulcer Self‐Efficacy Tool (VeLUSET).

Conclusion

The NHP and VLU‐QoL questionnaire seemed the most suitable PROMs for use by clinicians. However, a valid condition‐specific PROM is still required.

A single-arm trial indirect comparison investigation: a proof-of-concept method to predict venous leg ulcer healing time for a new acellular synthetic matrix matched to standard care control

To compare data on time to healing from two separate cohorts: one treated with a new acellular synthetic matrix plus standard care (SC) and one matched from four large UK pragmatic, randomised controlled trials [venous leg ulcer (VLU) evidence network]. We introduce a new proof-of-concept strategy to a VLU clinical evidence network, propensity score matching and sensitivity analysis to predict the feasibility of the new acellular synthetic matrix plus SC for success in future randomised, controlled clinical trials. Prospective data on chronic VLUs from a safety and effectiveness study on an acellular synthetic matrix conducted in one wound centre in the UK (17 patients) and three wound centres in Australia (36 patients) were compared retrospectively to propensity score-matched data from patients with comparable leg ulcer disease aetiology, age, baseline ulcer area, ulcer duration, multi-layer compression bandaging and majority of care completed in specialist wound centres (average of 1 visit per week), with the outcome measures at comparable follow-up periods from patients enrolled in four prospective, multicentre, pragmatic, randomised studies of venous ulcers in the UK (the comparison group; VLU evidence network). Analysis using Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed a mean healing time of 73·1 days for ASM plus SC (ASM) treated ulcers in comparison with 83·5 days for comparison group ulcers treated with SC alone (Log rank test, χ2 5·779, P = 0·016) within 12 weeks. Sensitivity analysis indicates that an unobserved covariate would have to change the odds of healing for SC by a factor of 1·1 to impact the baseline results. Results from this study predict a significant effect on healing time when using a new ASM as an adjunct to SC in the treatment of non-healing venous ulcers in the UK, but results are sensitive to unobserved covariates that may be important in healing time comparison.

Therapeutic ultrasound for venous leg ulcers

BACKGROUND

Venous leg ulcers are a type of chronic, recurring, complex wound that is more common in people aged over 65 years. Venous ulcers pose a significant burden to patients and healthcare systems. While compression therapy (such as bandages or stockings) is an effective first-line treatment, ultrasound may have a role to play in healing venous ulcers.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether venous leg ulcers treated with ultrasound heal more quickly than those not treated with ultrasound.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register (searched 19 September 2016); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; the Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 8); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, MEDLINE Daily and Epub Ahead of Print) (1946 to 19 September 2016); Ovid Embase (1974 to 19 September 2016); and EBSCO CINAHL Plus (1937 to 19 September 2016). We also searched three clinical trials registries and the references of included studies and relevant systematic reviews. There were no restrictions based on language, date of publication or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared ultrasound with no ultrasound. Eligible non-ultrasound comparator treatments included usual care, sham ultrasound and alternative leg ulcer treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the search results and selected eligible studies. Details from included studies were summarised using a data extraction sheet, and double-checked. We attempted to contact trial authors for missing data.

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven trials are included in this update; 10 of these we judged to be at an unclear or high risk of bias. The trials were clinically heterogeneous with differences in duration of follow-up, and ultrasound regimens. Nine trials evaluated high frequency ultrasound; seven studies provided data for ulcers healed and two provided data on change in ulcer size only. Two trials evaluated low frequency ultrasound and both reported ulcers healed data.It is uncertain whether high frequency ultrasound affects the proportion of ulcers healed compared with no ultrasound at any of the time points evaluated: at seven to eight weeks (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.71; 6 trials, 678 participants; low quality evidence - downgraded once for risk of bias and once for imprecision); at 12 weeks (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.73; 3 trials, 489 participants; moderate quality evidence - downgraded once for imprecision); and at 12 months (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.18; 1 trial, 337 participants; low quality evidence - downgraded once for unclear risk of bias and once for imprecision).One trial (92 participants) reported that a greater percentage reduction in ulcer area was achieved at four weeks with high-frequency ultrasound, while another (73 participants) reported no clear difference in change in ulcer size at seven weeks. We downgraded the level of this evidence to very low, mainly for risk of bias (typically lack of blinded outcome assessment and attrition) and imprecision.Data from one trial (337 participants) suggest that high frequency ultrasound may increase the risk of non-serious adverse events (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.64; moderate quality evidence - downgraded once for imprecision) and serious adverse events (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.89; moderate quality evidence downgraded once for imprecision).It is uncertain whether low frequency ultrasound affects venous ulcer healing at eight and 12 weeks (RR 3.91, 95% CI 0.47 to 32.85; 2 trials, 61 participants; very low quality evidence (downgraded for risk of bias and imprecision)).High-frequency ultrasound probably makes little or no difference to quality of life (moderate quality evidence, downgraded for imprecision). The outcomes of adverse effects, quality of life and cost were not reported for low-frequency ultrasound treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

It is uncertain whether therapeutic ultrasound (either high or low frequency) improves the healing of venous leg ulcers. We rated most of the evidence as low or very low quality due to risk of bias and imprecision.

Protease-modulating matrix treatments for healing venous leg ulcers

BACKGROUND

Venous leg ulcers (VLUs) are open skin wounds on the lower leg that occur because of poor blood flow in the veins of the leg; leg ulcers can last from weeks to years, and are both painful and costly. Prevalence in the UK is about 2.9 cases per 10,000 people. First-line treatment for VLUs is compression therapy, but around 60% of people have unhealed ulcers after 12 weeks' treatment and about 40% after 24 weeks; therefore, there is scope for further improvement. Limited evidence suggests non-healing leg ulcers may have persisting elevated levels of proteases, which is thought to deter the later stages of healing; thus, timely protease-modulating matrix (PMM) treatments may improve healing by physically removing proteases from the wound fluid.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of protease-modulating matrix (PMM) treatments on the healing of venous leg ulcers, in people managed in any care setting.

SEARCH METHODS

In September 2016 we searched: the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; CENTRAL; Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated PMM treatments for VLUs. We defined PMM treatments as those with a purposeful intent of reducing proteases. Wound healing was the primary endpoint.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 studies (784 participants) in this review; sample sizes ranged from 10 to 187 participants (median 56.5). One study had three arms that were all relevant to this review and all the other studies had two arms. One study was a within-participant comparison. All studies were industry funded. Two studies provided unpublished data for healing.Nine of the included studies compared PMM treatments with other treatments and reported results for the primary outcomes. All treatments were dressings. All studies also gave the participants compression bandaging. Seven of these studies were in participants described as having 'non-responsive' or 'hard-to-heal' ulcers. Results, reported at short, medium and long durations and as time-to-event data, are summarised for the comparison of any dressing regimen incorporating PMM versus any other dressing regimen. The majority of the evidence was of low or very low certainty, and was mainly downgraded for risk of bias and imprecision.It is uncertain whether PMM dressing regimens heal VLUs quicker than non-PMM dressing regimens (low-certainty evidence from 1 trial with 100 participants) (HR 1.21, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.97).In the short term (four to eight weeks) it is unclear whether there is a difference between PMM dressing regimens and non-PMM dressing regimens in the probability of healing (very low-certainty evidence, 2 trials involving 207 participants).In the medium term (12 weeks), it is unclear whether PMM dressing regimens increase the probability of healing compared with non-PMM dressing regimens (low-certainty evidence from 4 trials with 192 participants) (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.71). Over the longer term (6 months), it is also unclear whether there is a difference between PMM dressing regimens and non-PMM dressing regimens in the probability of healing (low certainty evidence, 1 trial, 100 participants) (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.41).It is uncertain whether there is a difference in adverse events between PMM dressing regimens and non-PMM dressing regimens (low-certainty evidence from 5 trials, 363 participants) (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.42). It is also unclear whether resource use is lower for PMM dressing regimens (low-certainty evidence, 1 trial involving 73 participants), or whether mean total costs in a German healthcare setting are different (low-certainty evidence, 1 trial in 187 participants). One cost-effectiveness analysis was not included because effectiveness was not based on complete healing.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence is generally of low certainty, particularly because of risk of bias and imprecision of effects. Within these limitations, we are unclear whether PMM dressing regimens influence venous ulcer healing relative to dressing regimens without PMM activity. It is also unclear whether there is a difference in rates of adverse events between PMM and non-PMM treatments. It is uncertain whether either resource use (products and staff time) or total costs associated with PMM dressing regimens are different from those for non-PMM dressing regimens. More research is needed to clarify the impact of PMM treatments on venous ulcer healing.

Wounds research for patient benefit: a 5-year programme of research

Background

Complex wounds are those that heal by secondary intention and include lower-limb ulcers, pressure ulcers and some surgical wounds. The care of people with complex wounds is costly, with care mainly being delivered by community nurses. There is a lack of current, high-quality data regarding the numbers and types of people affected, care received and outcomes achieved.

Objectives

To (1) assess how high-quality data about complex wounds can be captured effectively for use in both service planning and research while ensuring integration with current clinical data collection systems and minimal impact on staff time; (2) investigate whether or not a clinical register of people with complex wounds could give valid estimates of treatment effects, thus reducing dependence on large-scale randomised controlled trials (RCTs); (3) identify the most important research questions and outcomes for people with complex wounds from the perspectives of patients, carers and health-care professionals; (4) evaluate the potential contributions to decision-making of individual patient data meta-analysis and mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis; and (5) complete and update systematic reviews in topic areas of high priority.

Methods

To meet objectives 1 and 2 we conducted a prevalence survey and developed and piloted a longitudinal disease register. A consultative, deliberative method and in-depth interviews were undertaken to address objective 3. To address objectives 4 and 5 we conducted systematic reviews including mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis.

Results

From the prevalence survey we estimated the point prevalence of all complex wounds to be 1.47 per 1000 people (95% confidence interval 1.38 to 1.56 per 1000 people). Pressure ulcers and venous leg ulcers were the most common type of complex wound. A total of 195 people with a complex wound were recruited to a complex wounds register pilot. We established the feasibility of correctly identifying, extracting and transferring routine NHS data into the register; however, participant recruitment, data collection and tracking individual wounds in people with multiple wounds were challenging. Most patients and health professionals regarded healing of the wound as the primary treatment goal. Patients were greatly troubled by the social consequences of having a complex wound. Complex wounds are frequently a consequence of, and are themselves, a long-term condition but treatment is usually focused on healing the wound. Consultative, deliberative research agenda setting on pressure ulcer prevention and treatment with patients, carers and clinicians yielded 960 treatment uncertainties and a top 12 list of research priorities. Of 167 RCTs of complex wound treatments in a systematic review of study quality, 41% did not specify a primary outcome and the overall quality of the conduct and reporting of the research was poor. Mixed-treatment comparison meta-analysis in areas of high priority identified that matrix hydrocolloid dressings had the highest probability (70%) of being the most effective dressing for diabetic foot ulcers, whereas a hyaluronan fleece dressing had the highest probability (35%) of being the most effective dressing for venous ulcers; however, the quality of this evidence was low and uncertainty is high.

Conclusions

Complex wounds are common and costly with a poor evidence base for many frequent clinical decisions. There is little routine clinical data collection in community nursing. A prospective complex wounds register has the potential to both assist clinical decision-making and provide important research evidence but would be challenging to implement without investment in information technology in NHS community services. Future work should focus on developing insights into typical wound healing trajectories, identifying factors that are prognostic for healing and assessing the cost-effectiveness of selected wound treatments.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme.

Adaptive compression therapy for venous leg ulcers: a clinically effective, patient-centred approach

A prospective, randomised, 12-week study was performed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of two compression methods for venous leg ulcers (VLUs); a new adaptive compression therapy (ACT) system, combining intermittent and sustained pneumatic compression (n = 38) and a conventional four-layer bandage system (n = 52). Primary outcomes were ulcer healing and safety. Secondary outcomes were comfort, compliance, ulcer pain, patient-perceived product performance and quality of life. Ulcer healing rate was similar (31·6% versus 42·3%, respectively, P = 0·30) between the treatments. Adverse events and patient-rated comfort were also similar. Average daily usage for the dual system was 10·5 and 1·8 hours in the sustained and intermittent modes, respectively, representing its use during 71% of waking hours. Predicted final ulcer pain was also similar (P = 0·68). Performance was subjectively better for adaptive compression and significantly higher for exudate management (P = 0·04), skin protection (P < 0·001), removal ease (P = 0·0007), bathing (P < 0·0001) and sleep comfort (P = 0·0405). The adjusted final quality-of-life score was 0·1025 higher for adaptive compression (P = 0·0375). Subjects with healed ulcers attained higher final scores than unhealed subjects (P = 0·0004). This study provides evidence that ACT is comparably efficacious to successfully heal VLUs compared with four-layer bandage management but is better accepted and achieves higher patient-reported quality-of-life scores in these challenging patients.

Low-dose aspirin as an adjuvant treatment for venous leg ulceration: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (Aspirin4VLU)

AIM

The aim of this study was to determine the effect of low-dose aspirin on venous leg ulcer healing when used in addition to compression.

BACKGROUND

The mainstay of treatment for venous leg ulcers is compression therapy and there are few adjuvant treatments to accelerate healing.

DESIGN

Pragmatic, community-based, double-blind, randomized trial.

METHODS

Participants with venous leg ulcers will receive either 150 mg aspirin or placebo daily for up to 24 weeks. Participants will receive background treatment with compression therapy (system of choice guided by participant and/or clinical preference) delivered through district nursing services. The primary outcome will be time-to-healing. Secondary outcomes will include proportion healed at 24 weeks, change in ulcer area, change in health-related quality of life, adherence, efficacy of blinding and adverse events. The trial was funded in June 2014.

DISCUSSION

The trial commenced in March 2015 and is successfully recruiting. The trial is one of three trials that will contribute to an individual participant data meta-analysis to be undertaken at the York Trials Centre.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered 5 June 2014 ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02158806. Protocol version 1·1, 14 April 2015.

Aspirin for Venous Ulcers: Randomised Trial (AVURT): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Venous leg ulcers (VLUs) are the commonest cause of leg ulceration, affecting 1 in 100 adults. There is a significant health burden associated with VLUs - it is estimated that the cost of treatment for 1 ulcer is up to £1300 per year in the NHS. The mainstay of treatment is with graduated compression bandaging; however, treatment is often prolonged and up to one quarter of venous leg ulcers do not heal despite standard care. Two previous trials have suggested that low-dose aspirin, as an adjunct to standard care, may hasten healing, but these trials were small and of poor quality. Aspirin is an inexpensive, widely used medication but its safety and efficacy in the treatment of VLUs remains to be established.

METHODS/DESIGN

AVURT is a phase II randomised double blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled efficacy trial. The primary objective is to examine whether aspirin, in addition to standard care, is effective in patients with chronic VLUs (i.e. over 6 weeks in duration or a history of VLU). Secondary objectives include feasibility and safety of aspirin in this population. A target of 100 participants, identified from community leg ulcer clinics and hospital clinics, will be randomised to receive either 300 mg of aspirin once daily or placebo. All participants will receive standard care with compression therapy. The primary outcome will be time to healing of the reference ulcer. Follow-up will occur for a maximum of 27 weeks. The primary analysis will use a Cox proportional hazards model to compare time to healing using the principles of intention-to-treat. Secondary outcomes will include ulcer size, pain evaluation, compliance and adverse events.

DISCUSSION

The AVURT trial will investigate the efficacy and safety of aspirin as a treatment for VLU and will inform on the feasibility of proceeding to a larger phase III study. This study will address the paucity of information currently available regarding aspirin therapy to treat VLU.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study is registered on a public database with clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02333123 ; registered on 5 November 2014).

The ghost of Nora Batty: A qualitative exploration of the impact of footwear, bandaging and hosiery interventions in chronic wound care

OBJECTIVE

To explore the impact of footwear, bandaging and hosiery interventions in the everyday lives of women and men undergoing treatment for chronic, complex wounds in a city in England, UK.

METHODS

This study draws on data generated in semi-structured interviews with patients exploring outcomes and impacts of undergoing treatment for leg and foot ulcers undertaken as part of a UK National Institute for Health Research funded study. Footwear, bandaging and hosiery are explored here as aspects of material culture, not only in functional terms as a treatment supporting or hindering healing but also as part of the means by which people receiving treatment for two of the most common complex, chronic wounds, leg ulcers and foot ulcers, negotiate and understand their embodied selves in everyday life.

FINDINGS

Physical and social discomfort associated with interventions can lead to ambivalence about effectiveness. Not being able to dress appropriately impacts on the ability of people to feel comfortable and take part in special occasions and everyday events. In this context, the removal of bandaging or refusal to wear support hosiery which may be viewed as 'non-compliance' by a health professional may feel like a strategy of self-care or self-preservation from a patient perspective.

DISCUSSION

The study of material culture explores how inanimate objects work and how they are worked with in carrying out social functions, regulating social relations and giving symbolic meaning to human activity. The interviews show some of the ways in which footwear, hosiery and bandaging play a role in controlling the boundaries between the private (wounded and potentially socially unacceptable smelly, leaky, embodied), self and the public presentation of self.

Alginate dressings for venous leg ulcers

BACKGROUND

Venous leg ulcers are a common and recurring type of chronic, complex wound associated with considerable cost to patients and healthcare providers. To aid healing, primary wound contact dressings are usually applied to ulcers beneath compression devices. Alginate dressings are used frequently and there is a variety of alginate products on the market, however, the evidence base to guide dressing choice is sparse. 

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of alginate dressings compared with alternative dressings, non-dressing treatments or no dressing, with or without concurrent compression therapy, on the healing of venous leg ulcers.

SEARCH METHODS

For this first update, in March 2015, we searched the following databases: The Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE; and EBSCO CINAHL. There were no restrictions based on language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Published or unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of any type of alginate dressing in the treatment of venous ulcers were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Meta-analysis was undertaken when deemed feasible and appropriate.

MAIN RESULTS

Five RCTs (295 participants) were included in this review. All were identified during the original review. The overall risk of bias was high for two RCTs and unclear for three. One RCT compared different proprietary alginate dressings (20 participants), three compared alginate and hydrocolloid dressings (215 participants), and one compared alginate and plain non-adherent dressings (60 participants). Follow-up periods were six weeks in three RCTs and 12 weeks in two. No statistically significant between-group differences were detected for any comparison, for any healing outcome. Meta-analysis was feasible for one comparison (alginate and hydrocolloid dressings), with data from two RCTs (84 participants) pooled for complete healing at six weeks: risk ratio 0.42 (95% confidence interval 0.14 to 1.21). Adverse event profiles were generally similar between groups (not assessed for alginate versus plain non-adherent dressings).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The current evidence base does not suggest that alginate dressings are more or less effective in the healing of venous leg ulcers than hydrocolloid or plain non-adherent dressings, and there is no evidence to indicate a difference between different proprietary alginate dressings. However, the RCTs in this area are considered to be of low or unclear methodological quality. Further, good quality evidence is required from well designed and rigorously conducted RCTs that employ - and clearly report on - methods to minimise bias, prior to any definitive conclusions being made regarding the efficacy of alginate dressings in the management of venous leg ulcers.

Validation of the VEINES-QOL quality of life instrument in venous leg ulcers: repeatability and validity study embedded in a randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND

VEINES-QOL/Sym is a disease-specific quality of life instrument for use in venous diseases of the leg. Its relative scoring system precludes comparisons between studies. There were very few venous leg ulcer patients in the validation samples. We report a validation study for venous leg ulcers and develop a scoring system which enables comparison between studies.

METHODS

Four hundred fifty-one participants in the VenUS IV trial of the management of venous leg ulcers were asked to complete a VEINES-QOL questionnaire at recruitment, along with SF-12, pain, and other aspects of quality of life. VEINES-QOL was repeated after two weeks and after 4 months. Healing of ulcers was confirmed by blind assessment of digital photographs. Three scoring systems for VEINES-QOL were compared.

RESULTS

No floor or ceiling effects were observed for VEINES-QOL items, item-item correlations were weak to moderate, item-score correlations were moderate. Internal reliability was good. The VEINES-Sym subscale was confirmed by factor analysis. Test-retest reliability was satisfactory for the scale scores; individual items showed moderate to good agreement. Relationships with SF-12, pain, and the quality items confirmed construct validity. Participants whose ulcers had healed showed greater mean increase in scores than did those yet to heal, though they continued to report leg problems. An intrinsic scoring method appeared superior to the original relative method.

CONCLUSIONS

VEINES-QOL was suitable for use in the study of venous leg ulcers. The intrinsic scoring method should be adopted, to facilitate comparisons between studies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

VenUS IV is registered with the ISRCTN register, number ISRCTN49373072 .

VenUS IV (Venous leg Ulcer Study IV) - compression hosiery compared with compression bandaging in the treatment of venous leg ulcers: a randomised controlled trial, mixed-treatment comparison and decision-analytic model

BACKGROUND

Compression is an effective and recommended treatment for venous leg ulcers. Although the four-layer bandage (4LB) is regarded as the gold standard compression system, it is recognised that the amount of compression delivered might be compromised by poor application technique. Also the bulky nature of the bandages might reduce ankle or leg mobility and make the wearing of shoes difficult. Two-layer compression hosiery systems are now available for the treatment of venous leg ulcers. Two-layer hosiery (HH) may be advantageous, as it has reduced bulk, which might enhance ankle or leg mobility and patient adherence. Some patients can also remove and reapply two-layer hosiery, which may encourage self-management and could reduce costs. However, little robust evidence exists about the effectiveness of two-layer hosiery for ulcer healing and no previous trials have compared two-layer hosiery delivering 'high' compression with the 4LB.

OBJECTIVES

Part I To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HH and 4LB in terms of time to complete healing of venous leg ulcers. Part II To synthesise the relative effectiveness evidence (for ulcer healing) of high-compression treatments for venous leg ulcers using a mixed-treatment comparison (MTC). Part III To construct a decision-analytic model to assess the cost-effectiveness of high-compression treatments for venous leg ulcers.

DESIGN

Part I A multicentred, pragmatic, two-arm, parallel, open randomised controlled trial (RCT) with an economic evaluation. Part II MTC using all relevant RCT data - including Venous leg Ulcer Study IV (VenUS IV). Part III A decision-analytic Markov model.

SETTINGS

Part I Community nurse teams or services, general practitioner practices, leg ulcer clinics, tissue viability clinics or services and wound clinics within England and Northern Ireland.

PARTICIPANTS

Part I Patients aged ≥ 18 years with a venous leg ulcer, who were willing and able to tolerate high compression.

INTERVENTIONS

Part I Participants in the intervention group received HH. The control group received the 4LB, which was applied according to standard practice. Both treatments are designed to deliver 40 mmHg of compression at the ankle. Part II and III All relevant high-compression treatments including HH, the 4LB and the two-layer bandage (2LB).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Part I The primary outcome measure was time to healing of the reference ulcer (blinded assessment). Part II Time to ulcer healing. Part III Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs.

RESULTS

Part I A total of 457 participants were recruited. There was no evidence of a difference in time to healing of the reference ulcer between groups in an adjusted analysis [hazard ratio (HR) 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 1.25; p = 0.96]. Time to ulcer recurrence was significantly shorter in the 4LB group (HR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.94; p = 0.026). In terms of cost-effectiveness, using QALYs as the measure of benefit, HH had a > 95% probability of being the most cost-effective treatment based on the within-trial analysis. Part II The MTC suggests that the 2LB has the highest probability of ulcer healing compared with other high-compression treatments. However, this evidence is categorised as low to very low quality. Part III Results suggested that the 2LB had the highest probability of being the most cost-effective high-compression treatment for venous leg ulcers.

CONCLUSIONS

Trial data from VenUS IV found no evidence of a difference in venous ulcer healing between HH and the 4LB. HH may reduce ulcer recurrence rates compared with the 4LB and be a cost-effective treatment. When all available high-compression treatments were considered, the 2LB had the highest probability of being clinically effective and cost-effective. However, the underpinning evidence was sparse and more research is needed. Further research should thus focus on establishing, in a high-quality trial, the effectiveness of this compression system in particular.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN49373072.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 18, No. 57. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.