Skip to content

Compression Device Versus 4-layer Compression System

A Phase II Study to Compare the Effect of a Compression Device to That of a 4-layer Compression System on Subjects With Venous Leg Ulcers.

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT00821431
Enrollment
90
Registered
2009-01-13
Start date
2006-05-31
Completion date
2008-06-30
Last updated
2015-01-09

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Leg Ulcers

Brief summary

A prospective, Phase II, stratified, randomized study to compare the safety, ulcer healing, patient compliance (concordance) and resource utilisation of a compression device with IPC mode to a Class 3(c) UK standard graduated compression regime (4- layer system) on subjects with venous leg ulcers.

Interventions

Subjects randomized to the compression device regime were instructed to wear the compression device for all wakings hours for 12 weeks. The device was applied at the following pressures: Foot 40 mmHg, ankle 40 mmHg, mid-calf 30 mmHg, upper cuff 20 mmHg. Subjects were instructed to wear the Intermittent Pneumatic Compression for 2 hours per day.

DEVICEProfore

Subjects randomised to the 4-layer compression bandage regime, Profore, were to wear the bandage system for 24 hours a day and bandage applications/dressing changes were to be performed by a trained health care professional. Four different sizes of Profore were available and size selection was based on measurement of the ankle circumference of the subject on the index leg. Profore was to be used according to the instructions provided by the manufacturer described in their package insert.

Sponsors

ConvaTec Inc.
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Subjects over 18 years, willing and able to provide written informed consent * Subjects able to wear the compression device and the comparative regime and follow the requirements of the clinical investigation plan * Subjects who had an ankle to brachial pressure index (ABPI) of 0.8 or greater * Subjects who had a chronic venous leg ulcer (i.e. CEAP classification of C6 1) 2 cm2 in size or greater, who required graduated compression * Subjects who were outpatients

Exclusion criteria

* Subjects with a history of skin sensitivity to any of the components of the study product, comparator product or standard dressings * \*Subjects with more than one ulcer on the test leg * Subjects who had previously been entered into the study or a previous Amadeus study (U327, U332 or U337) or had participated in a previous clinical study within the past 3 months * Subjects with any condition that prevented application and removal of the device without external assistance * Subjects who had an active Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) or a recent DVT within the last 3 months * Subjects who exhibited any other medical condition which, according to the Investigator, justified the subject's exclusion from the study * Subjects who had leg sizes outside the following range: * Ankle - 12cm to 44cm * Calf - 22cm to 60cm * Below knee - 22cm to 68cm * Subjects who had an index venous leg ulcer greater in size than 10cm in any one dimension * Diabetic subjects with advanced small vessel disease * Denotes the exclusion criterion was amended and approved by the Ethics Committees as follows: * Amendment #1 dated 27th March 2007: \*Diabetic subjects who, in the opinion of the investigator, were not in reasonable metabolic control or had a history of hospitalisation within the last six months for the management of blood sugar and/or diabetic subjects with advanced small vessel disease * Amendment #2 dated 2nd August 2007: \*Subjects who had an index venous leg ulcer greater in size than 15cm in any one dimension * Amendment #3 dated 5th October 2007: * Deletion of exclusion criterion 'Subjects with more than one ulcer on the test leg' to permit inclusion of subjects with multiple ulcers on the test leg

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Safety Measured by the Number of Subjects With Adverse Events (Including Any Deterioration of Ulcer)12 Weeks

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Healing Measured by Number of Subjects Healed During the 12 Week Study Period12 weeks

Countries

France, Germany, Ireland, United Kingdom

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Compression Device
The electrical compression device is operated from battery or a main adaptor. It is based upon the use of inflatable pneumatic cuffs that apply controlled compression to the foot, ankle and calf. Compression Device: Subjects randomized to the compression device regime were instructed to wear the compression device for all wakings hours for 12 weeks. The device was applied at the following pressures: Foot 40 mmHg, ankle 40 mmHg, mid-calf 30 mmHg, upper cuff 20 mmHg. Subjects were instructed to wear the Intermittent Pneumatic Compression for 2 hours per day.
38
Profore, 4-layer Bandage
A high compression 4-layer bandage (Profore, Trademark of Smith and Nephew). This is a four-layer system that can be purchased either separately or as a package: a wound contact layer (Knitted viscose), a sub-compression wadding bandage, two layers of elastane bandage plus a top cohesive layer. Profore: Subjects randomised to the 4-layer compression bandage regime, Profore, were to wear the bandage system for 24 hours a day and bandage applications/dressing changes were to be performed by a trained health care professional. Four different sizes of Profore were available and size selection was based on measurement of the ankle circumference of the subject on the index leg. Profore was to be used according to the instructions provided by the manufacturer described in their package insert.
52
Total90

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyAdverse Event63
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up10
Overall StudyPhysician Decision01
Overall StudyProtocol Violation31
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject50

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicCompression DeviceProfore, 4-layer BandageTotal
Age, Continuous60.9 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 16.72
62.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 15.41
61.89 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 15.9
Region of Enrollment
France
1 participants5 participants6 participants
Region of Enrollment
Germany
9 participants12 participants21 participants
Region of Enrollment
Ireland
5 participants5 participants10 participants
Region of Enrollment
United Kingdom
23 participants30 participants53 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
21 Participants23 Participants44 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
17 Participants29 Participants46 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
33 / 3847 / 52
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 383 / 52

Outcome results

Primary

Safety Measured by the Number of Subjects With Adverse Events (Including Any Deterioration of Ulcer)

Time frame: 12 Weeks

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Compression DeviceSafety Measured by the Number of Subjects With Adverse Events (Including Any Deterioration of Ulcer)33 Number of Subjects with Adverse Events
Profore, 4-layer BandageSafety Measured by the Number of Subjects With Adverse Events (Including Any Deterioration of Ulcer)47 Number of Subjects with Adverse Events
Secondary

Healing Measured by Number of Subjects Healed During the 12 Week Study Period

Time frame: 12 weeks

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
Compression DeviceHealing Measured by Number of Subjects Healed During the 12 Week Study Period12 Number of subjects healed
Profore, 4-layer BandageHealing Measured by Number of Subjects Healed During the 12 Week Study Period22 Number of subjects healed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026