Trial reportAnatolian journal of cardiology2016
Feasibility and clinical benefit of cognitive-behavioral intervention for preparing patients for transesophageal echocardiography.
Trial report in Anatolian journal of cardiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Nurse-led preprocedural Valsalva maneuver training with a maximal expiratory pressure device during transesophageal echocardiography in South Korea: a quasi-experimental study.Journal of Korean biological nursing science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveDespite premedication, anxiety in patients undergoing transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is prevalent, often causing adverse physiological and psychological effects and contributing to decreased patient compliance. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of cognitive-behavioral intervention (CBI) in patients undergoing TEE and to assess its impact on the severity of anxiety, patient's and physician's comfort, and administered dose of sedatives.
methodsOur study was designed as a prospective, single-center, single-blinded, case-controlled pilot study. The study group comprised 49 patients (26 men, 66±8 years old) referred for TEE. Before the examination, 26 randomly selected patients underwent CBI. Sedatives were administered, if necessary. After the examination, patient anxiety and patient's and physician's comfort were evaluated using dedicated questionnaires and scores. Intergroup comparison was performed using Student's t-test for independent variables and Mann-Whitney U test and Pearson's chi-square test or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables.
resultsThe mean level of pre-TEE distress and anxiety were significantly lower in patients receiving CBI than in those without intervention (p=0.022). Furthermore, the application of CBI significantly reduced patient's discomfort (p<0.001) and resulted in increased comfort of physician (p<0.001) during TEE. The need of sedative administration (31% vs. 91%, p<0.001) and its mean dose was significantly lower in patients receiving CBI (1.6±0.5 mg vs. 2.7±1.6 mg midazolam, p=0.009).
conclusionsCBI is feasible in patients undergoing TEE. It decreases patient's anxiety and discomfort and increases physician's comfort. It also results in reduced use of sedatives during the examination.
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.