Trial reportRevista latino-americana de enfermagem2019
Randomized clinical study comparing active heating methods for prevention of intraoperative hypothermia in gastroenterology.
Trial report in Revista latino-americana de enfermagem, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- An Overview of the Implications for Perianesthesia Nurses in terms of Intraoperative Changes in Temperature and Factors Associated with Unintentional Postoperative Hypothermia.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2022Review
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
objectiveto compare the efficacy of three active heating methods in the prevention of intraoperative hypothermia in open gastroenterological surgeries.
methodrandomized clinical trial with a sample of 75 patients, whose initial body temperature measured by a tympanic thermometer. Esophageal temperature <36ºC was considered hypothermic. Patients were divided into three groups using: thermal mattress, underbody forced-air warming blanket and heated infusion system. The tympanic and esophageal temperatures were measured at different times of the intraoperative period, but the temperature considered gold standard was the esophageal. To evaluate the homogeneity of the groups, we used chi-square test (categorical variables). In the comparison of temperature measurements over time, the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the contrast profile test were used for the difference in temperature between the times. The non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the three groups. The level of significance was 5%.
resultsregarding the studied variables, the groups were not homogeneous as to the categorical variable sex. All patients presented hypothermia during the intraoperative period (p> 0.05).
conclusionthere was no significant difference between the heating methods in the prevention of intraoperative hypothermia. REBEC - Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (RBR- no. 52shjp).
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.