Dataset Information

The Effectiveness of Peer Group-Based Training on the Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Transradial Coronary Angiography.

ABSTRACT: Introduction:Coronary artery angiography using radial artery is one of the methods used for diagnosis of coronary artery disease, which causes physical and psychological problems in patients despite its precise and definite diagnosis. The present study is aimed at investigating the effect of peer group-based education on physical and psychological outcomes of patients undergoing coronary artery angiography through the radial artery. Methodology. The present clinical study was conducted on 60 patients undergoing coronary angiography through the radial artery in Vali-e-Asr educational hospital of Fasa during 2018 to 2019. The participants were divided into peer training and control groups (n = 30 in each group) using permutated block randomization. In the peer training group, the patients received the necessary precare training through peer training during and after angiography care. In the control group, the patients received the routine care by the nurse of the related ward. The peer group's stress, anxiety, and depression levels were evaluated before and after the training. Indeed, their comfort, tolerance, satisfaction, and pain levels were measured by a nurse after angiography at the time of entering the ward. Findings. The results indicated no significant difference between the two groups regarding the mean scores of stress, anxiety, and depression before the intervention (p > 0.05). After the intervention, however, there was a significant difference between the two groups concerning the mean score of anxiety (p < 0.05). Nonetheless, no significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of tolerance, comfort, satisfaction, and pain levels (p > 0.05). Finally, the level of pain decreased in both groups over time (p < 0.001). Conclusion:Peer group-based training was effective in decreasing the mean score of anxiety in the patients undergoing coronary angiography. Thus, this method is recommended to be utilized alongside other methods to train patients before coronary angiography due to its inexpensiveness and lack of side effects as well as not increasing the nurses' workload.

SUBMITTER: Dehghan AR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7201826 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The Effectiveness of Peer Group-Based Training on the Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Transradial Coronary Angiography.

Dehghan Ahmad Reza AR Fereidouni Zhila Z Najafi Kalyani Majid M

BioMed research international 20200426

<h4>Introduction</h4>Coronary artery angiography using radial artery is one of the methods used for diagnosis of coronary artery disease, which causes physical and psychological problems in patients despite its precise and definite diagnosis. The present study is aimed at investigating the effect of peer group-based education on physical and psychological outcomes of patients undergoing coronary artery angiography through the radial artery. <i>Methodology</i>. The present clinical study was cond ...[more]

PMID: 32420337

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCardiovascular disease (CVD) is the major cause of mortality worldwide. Coronary artery disease (CAD) contributes to half of mortalities caused by CVD. The mainstay of management of CAD is medical therapy and revascularisation. Revascularisation can be achieved via coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Peripheral arteries, such as the femoral or radial artery, provide the access to the coronary arteries to perform diagnostic or therapeutic (or both) procedures.ObjectivesTo assess the benefits and harms of the transradial compared to the transfemoral approach in people with CAD undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography (CA) or PCI (or both).Search methodsWe searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials on 10 October 2017: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science Core Collection. We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform in August 2017. There were no language restrictions. Reference lists were also checked and we contacted authors of included studies for further information.Selection criteriaWe included randomised controlled trials that compared transradial and transfemoral approaches in adults (18 years of age or older) undergoing diagnostic CA or PCI (or both) for CAD.Data collection and analysisWe used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. At least two authors independently screened trials, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. We contacted trial authors for missing information. We used risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous data, with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All analyses were checked by another author.Main resultsWe identified 31 studies (44 reports) including 27,071 participants and two ongoing studies. The risk of bias in the studies was low or unclear for several domains. Compared to the transfemoral approach, the transradial approach reduced short-term net adverse clinical events (NACE) (i.e. assessed during hospitalisation and up to 30 days of follow-up) (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.94; 17,133 participants; 4 studies; moderate quality evidence), cardiac death (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.88; 11,170 participants; 11 studies; moderate quality evidence). However, short-term myocardial infarction was similar between both groups (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.02; 19,430 participants; 11 studies; high quality evidence). The transradial approach had a lower procedural success rate (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.96 to 0.98; 25,920 participants; 28 studies; moderate quality evidence), but was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.95; 18,955 participants; 10 studies; high quality evidence), bleeding (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.74; 23,043 participants; 20 studies; low quality evidence), and access site complications (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.59; 16,112 participants; 24 studies; low quality evidence).Authors' conclusionsTransradial approach for diagnostic CA or PCI (or both) in CAD may reduce short-term NACE, cardiac death, all-cause mortality, bleeding, and access site complications. There is insufficient evidence regarding the long-term clinical outcomes (i.e. beyond 30 days of follow-up).

Project description:ObjectiveThe previous meta-analysis has assessed that distal transradial access (dTRA) in anatomical snuffbox is safe and effective for coronary angiography and intervention and can reduce radial artery occlusion. However, since the publication of the previous meta-analysis, several observational studies have been added, so we performed an updated meta-analysis to include more eligible studies to compare distal transradial access in anatomical snuffbox with conventional transradial access (cTRA).MethodPubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant studies from the literature published until 5 January 2021 to evaluate catheterization/puncture failure, hematoma, radial artery spasm, radial artery occlusion (RAO), access time, fluoroscopy time, radiation dose area product, total procedure time, and hemostatic device removal time. The pooled odds ratio (OR), weighted mean difference (WMD), and standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated for dichotomous and continuous variables, respectively.ResultsA total of 9,054 patients from 14 studies were included in the meta-analysis, and we found no significant difference in catheterization/puncture failure (OR = 1.94, 95CI [0.97, 3.86], P=0.06), hematoma (OR = 0.97, 95CI [0.55, 1.73], P=0.926), radial artery spasm (OR = 0.76, 95CI [0.43, 1.36], P=0.354), total procedure time (SMD = 0.23, 95CI [-0.21, 0.68], P=0.308), or radiation dose area product (WMD = 216.88 Gy/cm2, 95CI [-126.24, 560.00], P=0.215), but dTRA had a lower incidence of RAO (OR = 0.39, 95CI [0.23, 0.66], P < 0.001), shorter hemostatic device removal time (WMD = -66.62 min, 95CI [-76.68, -56.56], P < 0.001), longer access time (SMD = 0.32, 95CI [0.08, 0.56], P=0.008), and longer fluoroscopy time (SMD = 0.16, 95CI [-0.00, 0.33], P=0.05) than cTRA.ConclusionCompared with the cTRA, the dTRA has a lower incidence of radial artery occlusion and shorter hemostatic device removal time, which is worthy of further evaluation in clinical practice.

Project description:BackgroundThe excess volume of contrast media (CM) is a marker of a more severe coronary culprit lesion and longer intervention duration in patients undergoing cardiac procedures. However, it is unclear whether the contrast volume is directly correlated with worse clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between contrast dose and the incidence of 1-year major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and all-cause bleeding events in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization and coronary angiography (CAG).MethodsWe prospectively enrolled 10,961 consecutive patients diagnosed with coronary heart disease expecting CAG from 2012 to 2013. The study population was pursued with a follow-up duration of 1 year. The predictive value of contrast volume, divided into quartiles, for the risk of MACCE and all-cause bleeding events was assessed using logistic regression analysis.ResultsThe cumulative incidence of 1-year MACCE was 8.65%, which was directly associated with increasing contrast volume. In particular, MACCE was observed in 7.16%, 7.89%, 9.31%, and 11.73% of cases in the contrast volume quartile Q1 (≤100 ml), Q2 (101-140 ml), Q3 (141-200 ml), and Q4 (>200 ml), respectively (P < 0.001). Moreover, the incidence of 1-year all-cause bleeding events was noted in 4.70%, 5.93%, 7.28%, and 8.21% of patients in Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4, respectively (P < 0.001). The survival analysis showed that the 1-year MACCE rate was higher in patients using greater CM volume during the CAG. CM volume used >140 ml was associated with the occurrence of 1-year MACCE, and the incidence was dramatically elevated in patients exceeding a contrast volume of 200 ml (P = 0.007).ConclusionOur data suggested that higher contrast volume was significantly correlated with an increased risk of MACCE and all-cause bleeding events in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01735305; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01735305?id=NCT017353057rank=1.

Dataset Information

The Effectiveness of Peer Group-Based Training on the Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Transradial Coronary Angiography.

Publications

The Effectiveness of Peer Group-Based Training on the Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Transradial Coronary Angiography.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets