ArticleSystematic reviews2015
Bed rest for preventing complications after transfemoral cardiac catheterisation: a protocol of systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transradial versus transfemoral approach for diagnostic coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention in people with coronary artery disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Effect of early ambulation on comfort and vascular complications following electrophysiological studies: A randomized controlled trial.Journal of education and health promotion · 2024Article
- Bed rest duration and complications after transfemoral cardiac catheterization: a network meta-analysis.European journal of cardiovascular nursing · 2023Article
- Radial Access for Coronary Angiography Carries Fewer Complications Compared with Femoral Access: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- A novel wireless implant for central venous pressure measurement: First animal experience.Cardiovascular digital health journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTransfemoral cardiac catheterisation is an invasive medical procedure used for therapeutic or diagnostic purposes. Postoperative bed rest can prevent a number of complications such as bleeding and haematoma formation and can result in side effects such as back pain and urinary discomfort. Currently, there is no consensus regarding the optimal length of bed rest. Our objective is to assess the effects of post-catheterisation length of bed rest on bleeding and haematoma, other vascular complications, patient symptoms and patient discomfort, among patients who underwent transfemoral cardiac catheterisation.
methodsWe wrote this protocol in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols statement. We defined the search query by using the PICO framework (Population: Patients undergoing cardiac catheterisation;
interventionearly mobilisation; Comparison: late mobilisation; OUTCOMES: early and late complications). We will search six biomedical databases and five online registries to obtain both published and unpublished studies. We will include randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised controlled trials, and their quality will be independently appraised with the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care criteria for quality assessment. We will carry out a pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis to estimate the overall intervention effects from both direct and indirect comparisons. DISCUSSION: This review may have considerable implications for practice and help to achieve an effective and efficient management of patients who underwent cardiac catheterisation. This review will be grounded in an expanded search of 11 resources and will employ innovative statistical methods such as network meta-analysis. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42014014222 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.