Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24009097›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2013

Interventions for helping people adhere to compression treatments for venous leg ulceration.

Carolina D Weller, Rachelle Buchbinder, Renea V Johnston

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. [Indications and contraindications for modern compression therapy].Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2018
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Compression for Primary Prevention, Treatment, and Prevention of Recurrence of Venous Leg Ulcers: An Evidence-and Consensus-Based Algorithm for Care Across the Continuum.Journal of wound, ostomy, and continence nursing : official publication of The Wound, Ostomy and Continence Nurses Society
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Carolina D WellerDept of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, The Alfred Centre, Commercial Rd, Melbourne, VIC, Australia, 3004.
Rachelle Buchbinder
Renea V Johnston
Monash University · AU

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChronic venous ulcer healing is a complex clinical problem that requires intervention from skilled, costly, multidisciplinary wound-care teams. Compression therapy has been shown to help heal venous ulcers and to reduce the risk of recurrence. It is not known which interventions help people adhere to compression treatments.

objectivesTo assess the benefits and harms of interventions designed to help people adhere to venous leg ulcer compression therapy, and thus improve healing of venous leg ulcers and prevent their recurrence after healing. SEARCH

methodsIn May 2013 we searched The Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE; EBSCO CINAHL; trial registries, and reference lists of relevant publications for published and ongoing trials. There were no language or publication date restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions that help people with venous leg ulcers adhere to compression treatments compared with usual care, or no intervention, or another active intervention. Our main outcomes were number of people with ulcers healed, recurrence, time to complete healing, quality of life, pain, adherence to compression therapy and number of people with adverse events. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias of each included trial, and assessed overall quality of evidence for the main outcomes in 'Summary of findings' tables. MAIN

resultsLow quality evidence from one trial (67 participants) indicates that, compared with home-based care, a community-based Leg Club® clinic that provided mechanisms for peer-support, assistance with goal setting and social interaction did not result in superior healing rates at three months (12/28 people healed in Leg Club clinic group versus 7/28 in home-based care group; risk ratio (RR) 1.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 3.71); or six months (15/33 healed in Leg Club group versus 10/34 in home-based care group; RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.93); or in improved quality of life outcomes at six months (MD 0.85 points, 95% CI -0.13 to 1.83; 0 to 10 point scale). However, the Leg Club resulted in a statistically significant reduction in pain at six months (MD -12.75 points, 95% CI -24.79, -0.71; 0 to 100 point scale), although this was not considered a clinically important difference. Time to complete healing, recurrence of ulcers, adherence and adverse events were not reported.Low quality evidence from another trial (184 participants) indicates that, compared with usual care in a wound clinic, a community-based and nurse-led self-management programme of six months' duration promoting physical activity (walking and leg exercises) and adherence to compression therapy via counselling and behaviour modification (Lively Legs®) may not result in superior healing rates at 18 months (51/92 healed in Lively Legs group versus 41/92 in usual care group; RR 1.24 (95% CI 0.93 to 1.67)); may not result in reduced rates of recurrence of venous leg ulcers at 18 months (32/69 with recurrence in Lively Legs group versus 38/67 in usual care group; RR 0.82 (95% CI 0.59 to 1.14)); and may not result in superior adherence to compression therapy at 18 months (42/92 people fully adherent in Lively Legs group versus 41/92 in usual care group; RR 1.02 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.41)). Time to complete healing, quality of life, pain and adverse events were not reported. We found no studies that investigated other interventions to promote adherence to compression therapy. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere is a paucity of trials of interventions that promote adherence to compression therapy for venous ulcers. Low quality evidence from two trials was identified: one promoting adherence via socialisation and support (Leg Club®), and the other promoting adherence to compression, leg exercises and walking via counselling and behaviour modification (Lively Legs®).These trials did not reveal a benefit of community-based clinics over usual care in terms of healing rates, prevention of recurrence of venous leg ulcers, or quality of life. One trial indicated a small, but possibly clinically unimportant, reduction in pain, while adverse events were not reported. The small number of participants may have a hidden real benefit, or an increase in harm. Due to the lack of reliable evidence, at present it is not possible either to recommend or discourage nurse clinic care interventions over standard care.

Indexed as

Compression BandagesPatient ComplianceSelf-Help GroupsBehavior TherapyChronic DiseaseCounselingExerciseGoalsHumansInterpersonal RelationsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRecurrenceSelf CareVaricose UlcerWound Healing

Identifiers

PMID24009097
OpenAlexW4252438677

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.