ArticleHuman factors2023
Comparison of Physiological Effects Induced by Two Compression Stockings and Regular Socks During Prolonged Standing Work.
Article in Human factors, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of intermittent pneumatic compression device and compression stockings for workers with leg edema and pain after prolonged standing: a prospective crossover clinical trial.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
- Shank Circumference Reduction by Sleep Compression Stockings in University Students and Convenience Store Cashiers.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- The Effect of Standing Mats on Biomechanical Characteristics of Lower Limbs and Perceived Exertion for Healthy Individuals during Prolonged Standing.Applied bionics and biomechanics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe goal of this study was to evaluate and compare lower-leg muscle fatigue, edema, and discomfort induced by the prolonged standing of security guards wearing regular socks and those wearing 15-20 or 20-30 mmHg compression stockings as intervention.
backgroundCompression stockings are sometimes used by individuals standing all day at work. However, quantitative evidence showing their potential benefits for lower-leg health issues in healthy individuals during real working conditions is lacking.
methodForty male security employees participated in the study. All were randomly assigned to the control or one of the two intervention groups (I
resultsSignificant evidence of lower-leg long-lasting muscle fatigue, edema, and discomfort was observed after standing work for guards wearing regular socks. However, no significant changes were found for guards wearing either compression stockings.
conclusionIn healthy individuals, compression stockings seem to attenuate efficiently the tested outcomes in the lower leg resulting from prolonged standing. APPLICATION: Occupational activities requiring prolonged standing may benefit from 15-20 or 20-30 mmHg compression stockings. As similar benefits were observed for both levels of compression, the lower level may be sufficient.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.