Abstract
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effectiveness of a self-made modular elastic compression device for patients with a fracture of the tibia and fibula. METHODS: Fifty-nine healthy adult patients with a unilateral fracture of the tibia and fibula were randomly divided into an experimental group and a control group. The experimental group was given the self-made combined elastic compression device for the compression treatment of the affected limbs after the operation. The main endpoints included the convenience, safety, and effectiveness of the self-made modular elastic compression device for patients with a fracture of the tibia and fibula. RESULTS: There were 29 cases in the experimental group and 30 cases in the control group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the general data: age, gender, fracture site, and cause of injury. The preoperative swelling elimination time was 3.3 ± 1.2 days, and the postoperative swelling elimination time was 3.1 ± 1.4 days in the experimental group; the preoperative swelling elimination time was 6.3 ± 1.2 days, and the postoperative swelling elimination time was 7.3 ± 1.2 days in the control group. The preoperative and postoperative swelling degree in the experimental group was shorter than those in the control group. The difference in the postoperative detumescence time between the experimental group (3.1 ± 1.4 days) and the control group (7.3 ± 1.2 days) was significant, and the total hospital stay was 8.1 ± 1.5 days in the experimental group and 13 ± 2.5 days in the control group with a statistical significance of P < 0.05. The change of discharge hemoglobin volume (11.2 ± 6.5 g/L) of the experimental group was lower than that of the control group (3.5 ± 1.2 days), the total drainage volume was 260 ± 50 ml, and the change of admission and discharge hemoglobin volume was 30.3 ± 10.4 g/L. Specifically, although the difference in the average hospital stay between the two groups was statistically significant, the difference was only 1 day, and the clinical difference was not significant. However, in the change of the cumulative drainage volume and hemoglobin volume, the experimental group that was given compression therapy was significantly lower than the control group with a statistical significance (P < 0.05). The pressure injury (4 cases) in the experimental group was significantly lower than that in the control group (8 cases) (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: A modular combined elastic compression device in patients with a tibial and fibular fracture can significantly accelerate a patient's rehabilitation, shorten the hospital stay, reduce blood loss, relieve the patient's pain, and relieve the patient's social-economic burden during recovery.