Prevention Effects of Graduated Compression Stockings and Intermittent Pneumatic Compression on Deep Vein Thrombosis in SICU Patients: Pilot Study.
10.7739/jkafn.2015.22.3.249
- Author:
Hwasoon KIM
1
;
Ok Min CHO
;
Ji Sun KIM
;
Hai Ok JANG
;
Yeo Kyeong KIM
;
Seol Hee KIM
;
Hyo Nam MIN
;
Kyung Sun KWAK
;
Kee Chun HONG
;
Jang Yong KIM
;
Joonho CHUNG
Author Information
1. Inha University, Korea. khs0618@inha.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Compression stocking;
Intermittent pneumatic compression devices;
Critical care;
Venous thrombosis
- MeSH:
Critical Care;
Critical Illness;
Diagnosis;
Humans;
Incidence;
Critical Care;
Intermittent Pneumatic Compression Devices;
Male;
Pilot Projects*;
Stockings, Compression*;
Venous Thrombosis*
- From:Journal of Korean Academy of Fundamental Nursing
2015;22(3):249-257
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: The purpose of this pilot study was to investigate the effects of mechanical interventions for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) prophylaxis in surgical intensive care unit (SICU) patients. METHODS: The participants were assigned to the intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) and graduated compression stocking (GCS) intervention. Patients who met the criteria were selected for comparison from our previous study. Data for 140 patients were included in the final analysis. RESULTS: The mean age was 57.5 (+/-15.7) and 61.4% were men. About forty-seven percent of the participants were 61 years or over. In the second duplex scan, 3, 2 and 1 critically ill patients developed deep vein thrombosis in the control, GCS, and IPC groups, respectively. Incidences of DVT were 6.0%, 5.0%, and 2.0% for the control, GCS, and IPC groups, respectively. This difference was not significant. Relative risks of no intervention were 3.0 and 1.2 compared with IPC and GCS application. There were no significantly different variables among the three groups before the intervention except for diagnosis on admission. CONCLUSION: Although it may difficult to conclude that mechanical prophylaxis effectively prevents DVT among SICU patients because there was no statistical significance in this study, but incidence rates among the three groups differed greatly. The findings reveal that further study should be conducted with larger samples and randomized controlled trial for SICU patients.
