International journal of nursing practice · 2022
The effectiveness of warming approaches in preventing perioperative hypothermia: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Систематический обзорМетаанализСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Xiong Zenghua, Zhu Jiehong, Li Qihong, Li Yan
Аннотация
AIM: To assess if experimental warming interventions are superior to routine warming interventions in preventing perioperative hypothermia.
BACKGROUND: Perioperative hypothermia is a critical issue for the complications of surgery. There are various kinds of perioperative warming interventions, including experimental and routine warming interventions.
METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis for the randomized clinical trials of experimental warming interventions vs. routine warming interventions in the perioperative period.
FINDINGS: A total of 15 studies were included with 983 participants allocated to experimental warming interventions and 939 controls with routine warming interventions, who were receiving a variety of surgeries. The focused outcome was the intraoperative and postoperative body temperature. All included studies were randomized clinical trials. Among the participants receiving operations, the meta-analysis showed that routine warming intervention groups experienced lower intraoperative and postoperative body temperatures compared to the experimental warming groups. The meta-analysis results included positive mean differences, significant tests for overall effect and significant heterogeneity in the random-effects model.
CONCLUSIONS: In spite of significant heterogeneity, experimental warming interventions are likely to demonstrate superior warming effects when compared to routine warming interventions, as shown by the current meta-analysis results of randomized clinical trials.
BACKGROUND: Perioperative hypothermia is a critical issue for the complications of surgery. There are various kinds of perioperative warming interventions, including experimental and routine warming interventions.
METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis for the randomized clinical trials of experimental warming interventions vs. routine warming interventions in the perioperative period.
FINDINGS: A total of 15 studies were included with 983 participants allocated to experimental warming interventions and 939 controls with routine warming interventions, who were receiving a variety of surgeries. The focused outcome was the intraoperative and postoperative body temperature. All included studies were randomized clinical trials. Among the participants receiving operations, the meta-analysis showed that routine warming intervention groups experienced lower intraoperative and postoperative body temperatures compared to the experimental warming groups. The meta-analysis results included positive mean differences, significant tests for overall effect and significant heterogeneity in the random-effects model.
CONCLUSIONS: In spite of significant heterogeneity, experimental warming interventions are likely to demonstrate superior warming effects when compared to routine warming interventions, as shown by the current meta-analysis results of randomized clinical trials.