ArticleCureus2024
Comparative Efficacy and Cost-Effectiveness of Two-Layer Versus Four-Layer Compression Bandages for Venous Leg Ulcers: A Prospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A double-layer scaffold composed of 3D bioprinted layer of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor and electrospun nanofibers of abietic acid for full thickness skin repair.International journal of pharmaceutics: X · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to evaluate and compare the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of two-layer versus four-layer compression bandages in the treatment of venous leg ulcers (VLUs).
methodsA prospective study was conducted at a tertiary hospital from August 2022 to July 2024. A total of 100 patients with chronic VLUs were sampled. Of the patients, 50 were given two-layer (group A) compression therapy, and the other 50 were given four-layer (group B) compression therapy. Outcomes after both therapies were analyzed.
resultsThe mean age of the participants was 45.76 years, with a predominance of males (67%). Both bandaging systems demonstrated similar healing efficacy with no significant difference in ulcer size or healing time between groups. However, the four-layer bandage system required significantly fewer follow-ups (mean = 4.88) compared to the two-layer system (mean = 6.46) (p < 0.001). The mean total cost was higher for the four-layer system (₹3416) compared to the two-layer system (₹2907) (p = 0.004). Complications such as pain and pressure ulcers were comparable, though the four-layer system was associated with slightly higher discomfort and skin irritation.
conclusionThe four-layer bandage system may offer marginal advantages in wound healing and fewer follow-ups, but it is more expensive. The two-layer bandage system is more cost-effective and patient-friendly.
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.