ArticleAmerican journal of translational research2021
Intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) combined with an electric stimulator in the prevention of venous thromboembolism in stroke patients.
Article in American journal of translational research, 2021. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of Physical Restraint on the Occurrence of Venous Thromboembolism in Stroke Patients.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisArticle
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the clinical value of intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) combined with an electric stimulator in the prevention of venous thromboembolism in stroke patients.
methods58 stroke patients with hemiplegia admitted to the Department of Neurology in our hospital were recruited as the study cohort and randomly placed into a control group or an observation group, with 29 patients in each group. The control group was administered routine care and IPC, and the observation group was administered electric stimulation in addition to the treatment administered to the control group. We conducted a comparison and an analysis of the occurrences of thrombosis, the blood rheology indexes, the femoral vein flow rates, and the nursing satisfaction levels in the two groups. The circumferences of the hemiplegia patients' lower extremities were measured and recorded, and the circumferences of the healthy sides and the affected limbs were compared.
resultsOn the 7th day after the intervention, the observation group had a higher incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) than the control group (6.90% vs. 31.03%, P<0.05). The hemorheology indexes were lower after the treatment, and the hemorheology indexes in the observation group were higher compared with the control group (P<0.05). The observation group had a higher femoral vein flow velocity than the control group (P<0.05). On the 7th and 14th days after the intervention, the peak flow and average flow velocities in the observation group exceeded those of the control group (P<0.05). The nursing satisfaction rate in the observation group was higher than it was in the control group (96.55% vs. 82.76%, P<0.05). After 7 and 14 days of treatment, smaller changes in the hemiplegic limbs of the observation group were observed, compared to the control group (P<0.05).
conclusionIPC combined with an electrical stimulator can enhance the patients' blood hypercoagulability, effectively prevent the occurrence of DVT, and improve the nursing satisfaction levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34650763PMC8507034W3205313066What 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.