Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT07592208

Multilayer Inelastic Bandage Training in Physiotherapy Students

The goal of this quasiexperimental study is to evaluate the effects of structured training on inelastic compression bandaging proficiency in fourth-year physiotherapy students. The main questions it aims to answer are:

Can supervised training significantly improve primary outcomes such as technical bandaging skills (measured by a standardized rubric)? Does structured education enhance secondary outcomes, including interface pressure accuracy, application time, and student self-confidence? Researchers will compare a Supervised Education Group receiving real-time biofeedback to a Control Group receiving an instructional brochure to see if expert-led training is more effective than passive learning in bridging the gap between perceived and actual clinical competence.

Participants will:

Perform a baseline bandaging application (T0) assessed via a two-station Objective Structured Practical Examination (OSPE).

Be assigned to either the supervised training session (with Kikuhime pressure sensors for feedback) or the brochure-based self-study group.

Complete a post-intervention assessment (T1) to measure improvements in technical skill, pressure precision, and self-confidence levels.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Education, Competency-Based Physical Therapy Student

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Bolu Abant Izzet Baysal University

Bolu, Central, 14030, Turkey (Türkiye)

About this study

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the effects of structured training on inelastic compression bandaging skills, interface pressure accuracy, and self-confidence among physiotherapy students.

Methods: This study was conducted with 41 physiotherapy students (Education Group: n=21; Control Group: n=20). The Education Group received supervised training with objective pressure feedback while the Control Group received an instructional brochure. Clinical bandaging skills were evaluated using a two-station Objective Structured Practical Examination (OSPE), consisting of standardized rubric and time, and interface pressure monitoring. Students were assessed at baseline (T0) and post-intervention (T1) for bandaging skills (via rubric), interface pressure (Kikuhime), application time (seconds), and self-confidence (VAS).

Results: At baseline, only 9.5% of the Education Group and 0% of the Control Group achieved the target pressure. Post-intervention, these rates increased to 33.3% and 35.0%, respectively. The Education Group demonstrated a significantly greater improvement in Rubric scores (p=0.030, rrb =0.390) and self-confidence levels (p=0.005, rrb =0.512) compared to the Control Group. Intra-group analysis revealed that application times increased significantly in both the Education (p<0.001, rrb =0.983) and Control groups (p<0.001, rrb =1.000). While absolute real pressure error improved significantly within the Education Group (p=0.024, rrb=0.581), no significant inter-group difference was found for pressure-related variables (p>0.05). Notably, in the Education Group, self-confidence showed a strong positive correlation with Rubric scores (rho= 0.619, p=0.003) and a significant negative moderate correlation with absolute real pressure error (rho: -0.408, p=0.037). In contrast, no significant correlation was found between confidence and technical performance in the Control Group, suggesting a tendency toward overconfidence.

Conclusion: Supervised training with objective feedback is superior to passive learning for mastering the complex psychomotor skill of multilayer inelastic bandaging. While theoretical instruction may artificially inflate self-confidence, it fails to bridge the experience paradox which perceived competence masks technical insufficiency. Integrating real-time biofeedback into physiotherapy curricula is essential to ensure sensory calibration, technical proficiency, and patient safety, transitioning students from conceptual understanding to objective clinical mastery.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Volunteering to participate
  • Being a student in the department of physiotherapy and rehabilitation
  • Being in the fourth year of study
  • Having completed the Prosthetics and Rehabilitation course to ensure proficiency in the figure-of-eight bandaging technique.

Exclusion criteria

  • Having any orthopedic or neurological disease that hinders upper extremity function, particularly hand use
  • Presence of acute trauma to the upper extremity or hand
  • Having a known allergy to compression materials, as students performed bandaging practices on one another.
  • Students who had received any training or courses on compression bandaging prior to or outside of the 'Prosthetics and Rehabilitation' course

Treatment and study plan

Supervised Education Group

Other

The supervised intervention consisted of a 3-hour session led by a lymphedema therapist with 14 years of experience. Training was conducted in groups of 5-9 students using peer-to-peer practice. The program included:

Theory: Instruction on inelastic bandage properties, Laplace's Law, and pressure distribution principles.

Demonstration: A step-by-step showcase of multi-layer below-knee bandaging, including stirrup and figure-of-eight techniques.

Practice: Students practiced on peers in a supine position. Biofeedback: To master therapeutic pressure, students utilized the Kikuhime device for real-time monitoring. The instructor provided individual corrections for each application.

This structured approach aimed to calibrate students' tactile perception and ensure technical mastery through expert supervision and objective feedback.

brochure

Other

The control group was provided with a brochure detailing how to perform the bandaging. All technical details provided in the supervised training were included in this brochure. Visuals were used to demonstrate the final appearance of the stirrup technique, starting and ending positions, and the positioning of both the patient and the ankle. Great care was taken to ensure that the visuals and descriptions were simple, clear, and explanatory. After the brochure was distributed, any points of confusion were clarified for the students

Primary outcomes

  1. Bandaging Skills

    Time frame: Baseline, and immediately after the intervention

    A Bandaging Skills Rubric was developed to objectively evaluate bandaging proficiency. To prevent bias, the rubric assessments were performed by a researcher who did not provide the training and who was specifically trained on each rubric criterion. The rubric consisted of 5 criteria, each rated on a 3-point scale: Inadequate (1 point), Satisfactory (2 points), and Proficient (3 points). The minimum and maximum possible scores for the rubric are 5 and 15, respectively. Higher rubric scores indicate superior bandaging technique and quality.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Bandage Interface Pressure

    Time frame: Baseline, and immediately after the intervention

    The students were instructed to apply the bandages within a pressure range of 35-45 mmHg. Following the completion of the bandaging procedure, the interface pressure values at rest were recorded from B1 point (transition point of gastrocnemius tendon to muscle, from medial aspect of leg) in mmHg.

  2. Absolute real pressure error

    Time frame: Baseline, and immediately after the intervention

    To determine how much the participants deviated from the desired pressure-that is, to find the actual error-calculations were performed before and after the application according to the following formula:

    Absolute error = |Pre-training interface pressure/Post-training interface pressure - Desired mean bandage pressure (40 mmHg)| These values were recorded as mmHg.

  3. Perceived Interface Pressure

    Time frame: Baseline, and immediately after the intervention

    Physiotherapy students were asked to estimate the pressure they applied before and after the training, and their estimations were recorded in mmHg.

  4. Perceived pressure error

    Time frame: Baseline, and immediately after the intervention

    the perceived error was calculated for both pre- and post-training applications. The perceived error was calculated with the formula.

    Perceived error = |Pre-training perceived mean interface pressure/ Post-training perceived mean interface pressure - Pre-training interface pressure/ Post-training interface|. The perceived error was recorded as mmHg.

  5. Confidence in Bandage Application

    Time frame: Baseline, and immediately after the intervention

    The students' confidence in bandage application was evaluated using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The students were asked how confident they felt in achieving the desired compression bandage pressure, and they were requested to mark their level of confidence on the VAS . A score of '0' represented 'not confident at all,' while '10' represented 'highly confident.' The marked point was measured with a ruler and recorded in centimeters

  6. Bandage application time

    Time frame: Baseline, and immediately after the intervention

    The bandage application time was recorded in seconds before and after the training.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Abant Izzet Baysal University

Other

Collaborators

  • The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey

Registry information

Official study title

Evaluation of Skills, Interface Pressure Consistency and Confidence in Multilayer Compression Bandage Training for Physiotherapy Students: Quasi-experimental Study

Important dates

Study start
2025
Primary completion
2026
Study completion
2026
First posted
May 18, 2026
Registry last updated
May 18, 2026

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.