At a glance
ClinicalIndex Comparison RecordStandardized by ClinicalIndex from the ClinicalTrials.gov record · verify against the source.
Evaluating the Need for Pneumatic Compression Devices: A Randomized-controlled Trial (RCT) of Aspirin Versus Aspirin and Pneumatic Compression Devices
In Brief
A clinical study evaluating Aspirin and Portable Compression Device for Osteoarthritis. Completed, enrolled 80 participants across 1 site.
Detailed Summary
For patients undergoing total hip and knee arthroplasty, does the use of Aspirin alone compared to using Aspirin along with a mobile compression device provide equivocal results for preventing Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) after total joint arthroplasty? The investigator will evaluate the prevention of DVT/PE after total hip and knee arthroplasty will be evaluated to see if there is a decreased risk of bleeding while continuing to prevent thromboembolic disease. The equivalency of using the mobile compression devices with aspirin compared to aspirin alone in patients undergoing total hip and knee arthroplasty will be evaluated. A previous study has shown that patient compliance with the pneumatic compression device is less than 80%.
Study Details
Timeline
Interventions
If there is evidence that aspirin alone is equivocal to using both the pumps and aspirin, this could lower health care cost and burden for patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty while establishing that the rate of DVT/PE does not increase with the absence of the compression device.
If there is evidence that aspirin alone is equivocal to using both the pumps and aspirin, there could be lower health care cost and burden for patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty while establishing that the rate of DVT/PE does not increase with the absence of the compression device.