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

Summary Reasons for performing study Clinicians 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. Objectives Determination of sub-bandage pressure over a 24 h period using 3 bandaging techniques. Study design A randomised, crossover design using 9 healthy horses. Methods Horses 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® compression-measuring system at 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24 h after application. Results No time and treatment interactions were observed, and bandage pressures were maintained within each treatment group over the 24 h period. Mean sub-bandage pressures were different between all treatment groups (P<0.001) at 39 (95% confidence interval, 36.7–40.5 mmHg), 25 (95% confidence interval, 23.9–27.7 mmHg) and 5 mmHg (95% confidence interval, 4.1–7.8 mmHg) 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. Conclusions The CM bandage was superior to both ELA and NYL bandages with regard to measured sub-bandage pressure over the 24 h period. The clinical significance of the differences in sub-bandage pressure between treatments cannot be determined by this study.