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.

Personalized dietary management of advanced prostate cancer using nutrigenomics: a case report.

While there are emerging reports in the scientific literature on potential associations between cholesterol/lipids and prostate cancer, information on the dietary management of these cancer patients is currently lacking. We report on a 57-year-old white Australian male diagnosed with advanced prostate cancer who had personalized dietary management in preparation for and following his medical treatment: radiation and radical prostatectomy. Dietary recommendations were based on his blood results and nutrigenomic tests which showed a history of and genetic predisposition to dyslipidemia. Nutritional analysis also confirmed the need for dietary modification of his fat intake. Eighteen months post medical and dietary intervention his PSA level was reported at 0.1 ug/L and all blood lipid levels were within reference ranges. At two years there was no detectable disease recurrence and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) was not required. Personalized dietary recommendations could be a clinically beneficial addition to the multidisciplinary management of prostate cancer patients.

Assessing the healthcare costs associated with venous leg ulcer compression bandages - A scoping review.

AIM: To determine the monetary costs identified in economic evaluations of treatment with compression bandages among adults with venous leg ulcers (VLU). METHOD: A scoping review of existing publications was conducted in February 2023. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used. RESULTS: Ten studies met the inclusion criteria. To place the costs of treatment into context, these are reported in conjunction with the healing rates. Three comparisons were made: 1.4 layer compression versus no compression (3 studies). One study reported that 4 layer compression was more expensive than usual care (£804.03 vs £681.04, respectively), while the 2 other studies reported the converse (£145 vs £162, respectively) and all costs (£116.87 vs £240.28 respectively). Within the three studies, the odds of healing were statistically significantly greater with 4 layer bandaging (OR: 2.20; 95% CI: 1.54-3.15; p = 0.001).; 2.4 layer compression versus other compression (6 studies). For the three studies reporting the mean costs per patient associated with treatment (bandages alone), over the treatment period, analysis identified a mean difference (MD) in costs for 4 layer vs comparator 1 (2 layer compression, short-stretch compression, 2 layer compression hosiery, 2 layer cohesive compression, 2 layer compression) of -41.60 (95% CI: 91.40 to 8.20; p = 0.10). The OR of healing for 4 layer compression vs comparator 1 (2 layer compression, short-stretch compression, 2 layer compression hosiery, 2 layer cohesive compression, 2 layer compression) is: 0.70 (95% CI: 0.57-0.85; p = 0.004). For 4 layer vs comparator 2 (2 layer compression) the MD is: 14.00 (95% CI: 53.66 to -25.66; p < 0.49). The OR of healing for 4 layer compression vs comparator 2 (2 layer compression) is: 3.26 (95% CI: 2.54-4.18; p < 0.00001). For comparator 1 (2 layer compression, short-stretch compression, 2 layer compression hosiery, 2 layer cohesive compression, 2 layer compression) vs comparator 2 (2 layer compression) the MD in costs is: 55.60 (95% CI: 95.26 to -15.94; p = 0.006). The OR of healing with Comparator 1 (2 layer compression, short-stretch compression, 2 layer compression hosiery, 2 layer cohesive compression, 2 layer compression) is: 5.03 (95% CI:4.10-6.17; p < 0.00001). Three studies presented the mean annual costs per patient associated with treatment (all costs). The MD is 172 (150-194; p = 0.401), indicating no statistically significant difference in costs between the groups. All studies showed faster healing rates in the 4 layer study groups. 3. Compression wrap versus inelastic bandage (one study). Compression wrap was less expensive than inelastic bandage (£201 vs £335, respectively) with more wounds healing in the compression wrap group (78.8%, n = 26/33; 69.7%, n = 23/33). CONCLUSION: The results for the analysis of costs varied across the included studies. As with the primary outcome, the results indicated that the costs of compression therapy are inconsistent. Given the methodological heterogeneity among studies, future studies in this area are needed and these should use specific methodological guidelines to generate high-quality health economic studies.

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

Preventing facial pressure injuries among health care staff working in diverse COVID-19 care environments.

The aim of this study was to determine the impact of a specially designed care bundle on the development of facial pressure injuries among frontline health care workers wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 pandemic. This was a mixed methods study. First, a pre-posttest observational design was employed to evaluate the impact of the pre-piloted intervention, a care bundle including skin cleansing and hydration, protective material use, facemask selection and skin inspection, developed in line with international best practice guidelines. Data were collected using survey methodology. Frontline COVID-19 staff working in acute, community and ambulance services were invited to participate. Then, judgemental and volunteer sampling was used to select participants to undertake semi-structured interviews to elicit feedback on their perceptions of the care bundle. The sample included 120 acute hospital staff, 60 Ambulance staff, 24 Community Hub staff and 20 COVID-19 testing centre staff. A survey response rate of 61% was realised (n = 135/224). Of the participants, 32% (n = 43) had a facial pressure ulcer (FPI) pre-intervention and 13% (n = 18) developed an FPI while using the care bundle. The odds ratio (OR) was 0.33 (95% CI: 0.18 to 0.61; P = .0004), indicating a 77% reduction in the odds of FPI development with use of the care bundle. Analysis of the qualitative data from 22 interviews identified three key themes, the context for the care bundle, the ease of use of the care bundle and the care bundle as a solution to FPI development. The care bundle reduced the incidence of FPI among the participants and was found to be easy to use. Implementation of skin protection for frontline staff continues to be important given the persistently high incidence of COVID-19 and the ongoing need to wear PPE for protracted durations.

Developing Algorithm Based on Activity and Mobility for Pressure Ulcer Risk Among Older Adult Residents: Implications for Evidence-Based Practice.

BACKGROUND: A pressure ulcer (PU) is a localized injury to the skin or underlying tissue usually over a bony prominence. The prevention PU per patient per day is costly; therefore, the detection of a PU at its earliest stage is imperative to afford timely interventions. Currently, there are very few clinically useful tools to assist with early PU detection and prevention. AIM: There were two primary aims of this study: (1) to investigate the relationship between activity, mobility, and PU development; and (2) to ascertain the next steps for delineating an algorithm based on activity and mobility for detecting PU risk among older adult residents in long-term care. METHOD: This quantitative, prospective, descriptive, non-experimental study was conducted between July 2019 and March 2020 among 53 older adult residents who were followed for 4 consecutive days. Participants' Braden score, Elderly Mobility Scale (EMS) score, Movement Level, and 6-item Cognitive Impairment Test score were assessed. Further, the sacrum and heels were assessed daily using a non-invasive subepidermal moisture (SEM) scanner and visual skin assessment (VSA). SEM values > 0.5 were considered as indicative of the presence of an SEM-PU. RESULTS: The incidence rate of VSA-PU was 15.1% (N = 8). There was an incidence of 87.5% (N = 42) of SEM-PU damage. According to the Braden subscale, Mobility Braden, most of the participants (62.2%, N = 33) were assessed as having no limitations/slightly limited mobility, while the EMS indicated that most of the participants (67.9%, N = 36) were classed in an independent category. From the 42 SEM-PUs observed, 62% (N = 26) occurred among the low movers, and 38% (N = 16) occurred among the high movers. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: Using traditional methods for the assessment of movement does not provide insight into the protective nature of the movement. Given that both low- and high-moving patients can develop tissue damage, it is important to focus on the assessment of movement using more objective measures and algorithms, which enable real-time assessment of the protective nature of the movement. This would enable development of person-centered PU prevention strategies to reduce the burden of this significant healthcare problem.

Facial pressure injuries and the COVID-19 pandemic: skin protection care to enhance staff safety in an acute hospital setting.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the impact of a specially designed care bundle on the development of facial pressure injuries (PI) among frontline healthcare workers wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 pandemic. The primary outcome of interest was the incidence of facial PIs. The secondary outcomes of interest were facial pain while wearing PPE and ease of use of the care bundle. METHODS: This study used a voluntary survey by questionnaire, supplemented by a qualitative analysis of interviews from a small purposive sample that took place in one large Irish hospital over a two-month period in 2020. The hospital was a city-based public university teaching hospital with 800 inpatient beds. The intervention was a care bundle consisting of skin protection, face mask selection, material use, skin inspection, cleansing and hydration developed in line with international best practice guidelines. All staff working in COVID-19 wards, intensive care units and the emergency department in the hospital were given a kitbag containing the elements of the care bundle plus an information pamphlet. Data were collected via a survey and interviews. RESULTS: A total of 114 staff provided feedback on the use of the care bundle. Before using the care bundle 29% (n=33) of the respondents reported developing a facial PI, whereas after using the care bundle only 8% (n=9) of the respondents reported developing a facial PI. The odds ratio (OR) of skin injury development was 4.75 (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.15-10.49; p=0.0001), suggesting that after the care bundle was issued, those who responded to the survey were almost five times less likely to develop a skin injury. Interviews with 14 staff determined that the bundle was easy to use and safe. CONCLUSION: Among those who responded to the survey, the use of the bundle was associated with a reduction in the incidence of skin injury from 29% to 8%, and respondents found the bundle easy to use, safe and effective. As with evidence from the international literature, this study has identified that when skincare is prioritised, and a systematic preventative care bundle approach is adopted, there are clear benefits for the individuals involved.

Prevention of pressure ulcers among individuals cared for in the prone position: lessons for the COVID-19 emergency.

OBJECTIVE: Pressure ulcers (PUs) involve the destruction of skin and underlying tissue due to prolonged pressure and shear forces. These ulcers are painful and significantly reduce a person's quality of life. PUs are also expensive to manage and impact negatively on the achievement of cost-effective, efficient care delivery. METHOD: Prone positioning is a postural therapy that aims to enhance respiratory function through increasing oxygenation levels. In contemporary clinical practice, ventilation in the prone position is indicated for patients with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome. However, despite its advantages in terms of respiratory function, several studies have examined complications of prone position ventilation and have identified PUs (facial PUs as well as PUs on other weight-bearing areas of the body) as a frequent complication in patients who are already in a precarious medical situation. International data suggest that up to 57% of patients nursed in the prone position develop a PU. The aim of this clinical review is to identify and review evidence-based recommendations developed to facilitate the selection and application of preventive interventions aimed at reducing PU development in patients ventilated in the prone position. Given the current COVID-19 crisis, this review is timely as intensive care unit (ICU) patients with COVID-19 require ventilation in the prone position at a level that is disproportionate to the general intensive care population. Up to 28% of patients admitted to the ICU with confirmed infection due to severe COVID-19 are cared for in the prone position. The scope of this review is limited to adult individuals only. RESULTS: The skin assessment should be undertaken before proning and following positioning the patient back into the supine position. Although it is essential to keep the skin clean and moisturised, using pH-balanced cleansers, there is inconsistency in terms of the evidence to support the type of moisturiser. Use of positioning devices in addition to repositioning is recommended to offload pressure points on the face and body. Further, using dressings such as hydrocolloids, transparent film and silicone may be of benefit in decreasing facial skin breakdown. CONCLUSION: Given the importance of PU prevention in this cohort of patients, adopting a focused prevention strategy, including skin assessment and care, offloading and pressure redistribution, and dressings for prevention may contribute to a reduction in the incidence and prevalence of these largely preventable wounds.

What are the effects of care bundles on the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia in paediatric and neonatal intensive care units? A systematic review.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this review was to ascertain the impact of ventilator bundles on the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia in mechanically ventilated neonates and children in intensive care units. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted. Key computerised databases (CINAHL, Medline, Embase and Cochrane) as well as additional sources, with no publication date limitations, were extensively searched in January 2018. Inclusion criteria focused on ventilator bundles used in mechanically ventilated neonates and children aged from 0 to 18 years. After identification and inclusion, all studies were critically appraised for quality. Data were analysed and narratively synthesised. RESULTS: Eight studies of observational and nonrandomised interventional methods design were included in the review. However, the validity of five of the eight studies which were reviewed was considered substandard. In addition, there were variations in the care bundles elements studied. Nevertheless, all these studies demonstrated that the incidences of VAP in mechanically ventilated neonates and children were found to be significantly reduced by the use of ventilator bundles. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This systematic review determines that ventilator bundles impact positively on the incidence of VAP in critically ill neonates and children in the neonatal intensive care unit and paediatric intensive care unit. However, the variations in the bundle elements and insufficient valid evidence necessitates further research in the area to validate the findings and to ensure standardisation of clinical practice. Prevention of VAP is aimed at avoiding the risk of aspiration in the lungs, colonisation of respiratory tract with pathogenic microorganisms and contamination of respiratory equipment. Moreover, the implementation of evidence-based interventions grouped together is fundamental to improve patient outcomes. It is recommended that a further bona fide research is required to standardise the components of paediatric ventilator bundles.