Yesterday, I detailed some pelvic binders commonly available
in the US.
Today, I’ll go through the (little) science there is regarding which are better
than others.

There are a number of factors to consider when choosing one
of these products. They are:

• Does it work?
• Does it hurt or cause skin damage?
• Is it easy to use?
• How much does it cost?

It’s difficult to determine how well binders work in the live,
clinical setting. But biomechanical studies can serve as a surrogate to try to answer
this question. One such cadaver study was carried out in the Netherlands a
few years ago. They created one of three different fracture types in pelvis
specimens. Special locator wires were placed initially so they could measure bone movement
before and after binder placement. All three of the previously discussed
commercial binders were used.

Here are the factoids:

• In fracture patterns that were partially stable or unstable,
  all binders successfully closed the pelvic ring.
• None of the binders caused adverse displacements of fracture
  fragments.
• Pulling force to achieve complete reduction was lowest with
  the T-POD (40 Newtons) and highest with the SAM
  pelvic sling (120 Newtons).
  The SAM sling limits compression to 150 Newtons,
  which was more than adequate to close the pelvis.

So what about harm? A healthy volunteer study was used to
test each binder for tissue pressure levels. The 80 volunteers were outfitted
with a pressure sensing mat around their pelvis, and readings were taken with
each binder in place.

Here are the additional factoids:

• The tissue damage threshold was assumed to be 9.3 kPa
  sustained for more than 2-3 hours based on the 1994 paper cited below.
• All binders exceeded the tissue damage threshold at the
  greater trochanters and sacrum while lying on a backboard. It was highest with
  the Pelvic Binder and lowest with the SAM sling.
• Pressures over the trochanters decreased significantly after
  transfer to a hospital bed, but the Pelvic Binder pressures remained at the
  tissue damage level.
• Pressures over the sacrum far exceeded the tissue damage pressure
  with all binders on a backboard and it remained at or above this level even
  after transfer to a bed. Once again, the Pelvic Binder pressures were higher. The
  other splints had similar pressures.

And finally, the price! Although your results may vary due to
your buying power, the SAM sling is about $50-$70, the Pelvic Binder $140, and
the T-POD $125.

Bottom line: The binder that performed the best (equivalent
biomechanical testing, better tissue pressure profile) was the SAM sling. It also happens to be the least expensive, although it takes a little more elbow grease to apply. In my mind, that’s a winning combo.
Plus, it’s narrow, which allows easy access to the abdomen and groins for
procedures. But remember, whichever one you choose, get them off as soon as
possible to avoid skin complications.

What’s the best pelvic binder? Part 1

References:

• Comparison of three different pelvic circumferential
  compression devices: a biomechanical cadaver study. JBJS 93:230-240, 2011.
• Randomised clinical trial comparing pressure characteristics
  of pelvic circumferential compression devices in healthy volunteers. Injury 42:1020-1026,
  2011.
• Pressure sores. BMJ 309(6959):853-857, 1994.

Several products for compressing the fractured pelvis are available. They range from free and simple (a sheet), to a bit more complicated and expensive. How to decide which product to use? Today, I’ll discuss the four commonly used products. Tomorrow, I’ll look at the science.

First, let’s dispense with the sheet. Yes, it’s very cheap. But it’s not easy to use correctly, and more difficult to secure. Click here to see my post on its use.

There are three commercial products that are commonly used. First is the Pelvic Binder from the company of the same name (www.pelvicbinder.com). It consists of a relatively wide belt with a tensioning mechanism that attaches to the belt using velcro. One size fits all, so you may have to cut down the belt for smaller patients. Proper tension is gauged by being able to insert two fingers under the binder.

Next is the SAM Pelvic Sling from SAM Medical Products (http://www.sammedical.com). This device is a bit fancier, is slimmer, and the inside is more padded. It uses a belt mechanism to tighten and secure the sling. This mechanism automatically limits the amount of force applied to avoid problems with excessive compression. It comes in three sizes, and the standard size fits 98% of the population, they say.

Finally, there is the T-POD from Pyng Medical (http://www.pyng.com/products/t-podresponder). This one looks similar to the Pelvic Binder in terms of width and tensioning. It is also a cut to fit, one size fits all device. It has a pull tab that uses a pulley system to apply tension. Again, two fingers must be inserted to gauge proper tension. 

So those are the choices. Tomorrow, I’ll go over some of the data and pricing so you can make intelligent choices about selecting the right device for you.

Related posts:

• Pelvic compression with a sheet
• Bleeding from pelvic fractures
• Pelvic radiographs demystified