Comparison of sub-bandage pressures achieved by 3 abdominal bandaging techniques in horses

Reasons for performing studyClinicians frequently place post operative abdominal bandages on horses undergoing laparotomies. Presently, no information exists on the amount of incisional support provided by these bandages. Determination of sub-bandage pressure provides a means of comparing the ability of different bandages to support incisions. ObjectivesDetermination of sub-bandage pressure over a 24h period using 3 bandaging techniques. Study designA randomised, crossover design using 9 healthy horses. MethodsHorses were randomly assigned to a treatment regimen consisting of placement of 3 abdominal bandage types, namely an elastic bandage (ELA), the CMTM Hernia Heal Belt (CM) or a nylon binder (NYL). The sub-bandage pressures for each bandage were measured with the Picopress (R) compression-measuring system at 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24h after application. ResultsNo time and treatment interactions were observed, and bandage pressures were maintained within each treatment group over the 24h period. Mean sub-bandage pressures were different between all treatment groups (P<0.001) at 39 (95% confidence interval, 36.7-40.5mmHg), 25 (95% confidence interval, 23.9-27.7mmHg) and 5mmHg (95% confidence interval, 4.1-7.8mmHg) for CM, ELA and NYL bandages, respectively. Horses were more likely to lie down with the CM (P = 0.02) and ELA treatments (P = 0.0002) when compared with the NYL treatment. The ELA bandages were more likely to displace caudally compared with both CM and NYL bandages. ConclusionsThe CM bandage was superior to both ELA and NYL bandages with regard to measured sub-bandage pressure over the 24h period. The clinical significance of the differences in sub-bandage pressure between treatments cannot be determined by this study.