English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

There is lack consensus on superiority of transparent vs. pressure dressing for prevention of post-cardiac catheterization pain, discomfort and hematoma. Therefore, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis of available RCTs on this subject. Methods: We performed a systematic search of RCTs published between in 2000-2019 in English language using databases including PubMed Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, ERMED Journals, Clinical trials database, DELNET, Google Scholar and Discovery Search. Studies conducted on adult patients with femoral dressing after cardiac catheterization measuring pain, discomfort, hematoma as intended outcomes have been included. Data extraction, critical appraisal, assessment of risk bias was done and decisions on quality were made on mutual consensus. Mantel-Haenszel (MH) and odds ratio for dichotomous variables was calculated by Review Manager 5.3 software. Results: Out of all identified studies, only 5 studies comprising 664 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and met the quality assessment. Incidence of discomfort (25, 333) were significantly less in transparent dressing group as compared to pressure dressing group (149, 331); odds ratio 0.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.06-0.15; I2 = 0%, P= 0.00. Four studies reported significantly lower number of pain cases in transparent dressing (17, 203) as compared to pressure dressing (57, 201); odds ratio 0.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.03-0.59; I2 = 47%, P= 0.01). However, incidence of hematoma did not reveal any significant difference between two groups. Conclusion: Transparent dressing is a better option in patients with femoral/groin dressing after cardiac catheterization as it is more effective in prevention of pain and discomfort.

journal of caring sciences

Efficacy of Transparent vs. Pressure Dressing in Prevention of Post-Cardiac Catheterization Pain, Discomfort and Hematoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of RCTs