Effectiveness of neuromuscular electrical stimulation on venous thromboprophylaxis in surgical patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice Pub Date : 2024-11-15 DOI:10.1016/j.ctcp.2024.101932
Jin Yang , Haiou Qi , Jingying Huang , Miaomiao Xu , Zihao Xue , Yina Wang
{"title":"Effectiveness of neuromuscular electrical stimulation on venous thromboprophylaxis in surgical patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Jin Yang ,&nbsp;Haiou Qi ,&nbsp;Jingying Huang ,&nbsp;Miaomiao Xu ,&nbsp;Zihao Xue ,&nbsp;Yina Wang","doi":"10.1016/j.ctcp.2024.101932","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and purpose</h3><div>The effectiveness of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) for venous thromboprophylaxis is still debatable. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness and safety of NMES among surgical patients undergoing elective surgery.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, CINAHL, Wanfang, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Chinese Biomedical Database from their inception to February 1st, 2024. Two reviewers independently assessed, extracted, and appraised the included studies. The meta-analyses incorporated two primary comparisons: NMES versus basic thromboprophylaxis and NMES versus other mechanical thromboprophylaxis. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Sixteen studies involving 1685 participants were analysed, with all outcomes being assessed within 14 days postoperatively. Compared with basic thromboprophylaxis and graduated compression stockings, NMES significantly reduced the incidence of postoperative deep venous thrombosis (all <em>p</em> &lt; 0.05). Compared with basic thromboprophylaxis and other mechanical basic thromboprophylaxis, NMES significantly improved postoperative D-dimer level and femoral venous peak velocity (all <em>p</em> &lt; 0.05). No studies reported NMES device-related adverse events. The GRADE results showed low to very low certainty levels of evidence.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>NMES is a promising mechanical strategy for venous thromboprophylaxis in surgical patients. High-quality RCTs are required to elucidate the therapeutic benefits of NMES compared to other mechanical prevention methods and to standardize its clinical application.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48752,"journal":{"name":"Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice","volume":"58 ","pages":"Article 101932"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1744388124001051","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and purpose

The effectiveness of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) for venous thromboprophylaxis is still debatable. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness and safety of NMES among surgical patients undergoing elective surgery.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, CINAHL, Wanfang, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and Chinese Biomedical Database from their inception to February 1st, 2024. Two reviewers independently assessed, extracted, and appraised the included studies. The meta-analyses incorporated two primary comparisons: NMES versus basic thromboprophylaxis and NMES versus other mechanical thromboprophylaxis. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence.

Results

Sixteen studies involving 1685 participants were analysed, with all outcomes being assessed within 14 days postoperatively. Compared with basic thromboprophylaxis and graduated compression stockings, NMES significantly reduced the incidence of postoperative deep venous thrombosis (all p < 0.05). Compared with basic thromboprophylaxis and other mechanical basic thromboprophylaxis, NMES significantly improved postoperative D-dimer level and femoral venous peak velocity (all p < 0.05). No studies reported NMES device-related adverse events. The GRADE results showed low to very low certainty levels of evidence.

Conclusion

NMES is a promising mechanical strategy for venous thromboprophylaxis in surgical patients. High-quality RCTs are required to elucidate the therapeutic benefits of NMES compared to other mechanical prevention methods and to standardize its clinical application.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
神经肌肉电刺激对手术患者静脉血栓预防的效果:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景和目的:神经肌肉电刺激(NMES)用于静脉血栓预防的有效性仍存在争议。本系统综述和荟萃分析评估了神经肌肉电刺激在择期手术患者中的有效性和安全性:方法:从 PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials、Web of Science、CINAHL、万方数据库、中国国家知识基础设施和中国生物医学数据库中检索了从开始到 2024 年 2 月 1 日的随机对照试验(RCT)和准实验研究。两位审稿人对纳入的研究进行了独立评估、提取和鉴定。荟萃分析包括两项主要比较:NMES 与基本血栓预防疗法的比较,以及 NMES 与其他机械血栓预防疗法的比较。采用建议、评估、发展和评价分级法(GRADE)评估证据的确定性:对涉及 1685 名参与者的 16 项研究进行了分析,所有结果均在术后 14 天内进行评估。与基本的血栓预防措施和渐进式弹力袜相比,NMES能显著降低术后深静脉血栓的发生率(均为P 结论:NMES是一种很有前景的机械性血栓预防措施:NMES 是一种很有前景的外科手术患者静脉血栓预防机械策略。要阐明 NMES 与其他机械预防方法相比的治疗效果,并规范其临床应用,还需要进行高质量的 RCT 研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice
Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
6.70%
发文量
157
审稿时长
40 days
期刊介绍: Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice is an internationally refereed journal published to meet the broad ranging needs of the healthcare profession in the effective and professional integration of complementary therapies within clinical practice. Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice aims to provide rigorous peer reviewed papers addressing research, implementation of complementary therapies (CTs) in the clinical setting, legal and ethical concerns, evaluative accounts of therapy in practice, philosophical analysis of emergent social trends in CTs, excellence in clinical judgement, best practice, problem management, therapy information, policy development and management of change in order to promote safe and efficacious clinical practice. Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice welcomes and considers accounts of reflective practice.
期刊最新文献
Associations of physical activity, screen time, sleep duration with optimal eating habits among adolescents Practitioner characteristics of osteopaths who treat pregnant women and children: An Australasian perspective from two practice-based research networks Effectiveness of neuromuscular electrical stimulation on venous thromboprophylaxis in surgical patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis “There is a way to work together”: A qualitative study on complementary medicine therapists' perceptions of their role in the Swiss healthcare system Effects of mind-body exercise in children with cerebral palsy—A systematic review and meta-analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1