Background and purpose. Cryotherapy and compression have many widely
accepted therapeutic benefits that have been utilized for years in the treatment of edema. There are several common treatment options for edema reduction; two popular treatments include the Aircast® Cryo/Cuff, providing ice with compression, and the Chattanooga Group Inc. Auto Edema Reduction (A.E.R.) Boot Sport, providing intermittent compression. The purpose of our study was to compare the efficacy of the A.E.R. Boot Sport and Cryo/Cuffin reducing edema. Methods. Fifteen adults, ages 21-48, had their foot/ankle measured via water volumetric testing in the morning within one hour of waking, and then again 12 hours later. The subjects were then randomly treated with eiher A.E.R. Boot Sport or Cryo/Cuff and then re -measured immediately. One week later the measurements were repeated and the opposite treatment applied. Results. A
significant increase in foot/ankle volume was noted over a 12 hour period for all subjects. Volume increased from l091± 234mL to llll± 232mL (p=O.OOl). There was no significant difference in foot/ankle volume reduction between devices (p=.28). The pre- to post-treatment differences were 11± llmL and 8± 21mL for Cryo/Cuff and A.E.R. Boot Sport, respectively. However, post-hoc analysis revealed a significant gender by device interaction (p=.002). A significant change in foot/ankle volume was noted for female subjects following Cryo/Cuff treatment, no change in volume was noted in male subjects. Neither group demonstrated a change in foot/ankle volume following treatment with A.E.R. Boot Sport. Discussion and Conclusion. We found a significant reduction of naturally occurring edema for females with Cryo/Cuff treatment, but not for
males. We were unable to identify any significant differences in treating edema with the A.E.R. Boot Sport.
Files are restricted to Pacific University. Sign in to view.