Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “intermittent pneumatic compression devices”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

111 records · Page 7Linked to original sources
PubMed2026

Impact of a thermal care bundle on peri-operative hypothermia, surgical site infection, and readmissions in osteosynthesis patients: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Maintaining normothermia throughout the peri-operative period prevents the occurrence of complications related to hypothermia. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of a thermal care bundle with a short prewarming period on inadvertent peri-operative hypothermia (IPH), surgical site infection (SSI), and unplanned readmission among osteosynthesis patients, and to identify associated variables. DESIGN: Open-label, randomised controlled trial. SETTING: University hospital. PATIENTS: One hundred and forty-eight patients who underwent osteosynthesis surgery. INTERVENTION: The intervention group received the thermal care bundle, which consisted in prewarming patients 10 min before anaesthesia delivery and maintaining body temperature with a forced air device during surgery and the immediate postoperative period; in addition, the operating room environmental temperature was kept at 21 °C, and fluids were warmed to 38 °C. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: For the primary objective, hypothermia was defined as core body temperature below 36 °C and measured using the 3M Spot On zero heat flux sensor. Core temperature was recorded upon admission to the pre-operative holding area and subsequently every 30 min until postanaesthesia care unit (PACU) discharge. Secondary objectives were SSI and readmissions: a follow-up at 30 to 60 and 90 days was performed by the principal investigator. RESULTS: All 148 patients completed the study, and there were no significant differences between the groups at baseline. At the start of surgery, the incidence of hypothermia was significantly lower in the bundle group (1.3 vs. 9.9% among controls; odds ratio = 7.59, P  = 0.021). A significantly lower incidence of hypothermia was also observed at admission to the PACU (14.3% in the bundle group vs. 29.6% among controls; odds ratio = 2.07; P  = 0.024). Application of the bundle increased patients' core body temperature by 0.13 °C (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.003 to 0.254; P  = 0.045). Patients in the bundle group had a slightly lower observed incidence of wound infections requiring readmission (odds ratio = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.04 to 2.92), although this difference was not statistically significant ( P  = 0.332). CONCLUSIONS: The bundle reduces peri-operative hypothermia by up to 59%, but does not affect on SSI; factors like presurgery hospital stay, operating room and PACU occupancy were identified as risk factors for SSI. REGISTRATION: 21 July 2022: NCT05469958 (Clinical Trials.gov), first recruitment 15 August 2022.

Adult↗
PubMed2026

Adding Rib Mobilization to Diaphragm Release Techniques in Patients With Non-Specific Neck Pain: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Non-specific neck pain (NSNP) is a frequent issue that can negatively affect both mobility and function. Recently, there has been growing interest in newer therapeutic approaches, including rib mobilization and diaphragm release techniques, as potential ways to address NSNP and support better outcomes for those affected. PURPOSE: To find out the immediate effects of how (DRT) combined with (RMT) affects the level of pain and the extent to which patients' functional abilities are improved in cases of NSNP. METHODS: For this prospective RCT, 96 participants aged 20 to 45 years were randomly assigned to one of three equal groups based on their pain score (VAS). Group B engaged in (DRT) for 40 minutes, three times weekly for 8 weeks, in contrast to Group A, which got both RMT combined with DRT. Group C (active control) received advice and some exercises. Measurements were collected before and after the intervention; the primary outcomes included pain severity, evaluated using a visual analog scale (VAS); active neck range of motion (ROM), measured with a cervical range of motion (CROM) device; and neck flexion endurance. Additionally, the secondary outcome of neck-related disability was assessed using the Neck Disability Index (NDI). RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was identified among the three groups at baseline; nevertheless, a treatment effect emerged after 8 weeks (p = 0.001 and f-value = 4.15, ƞ2 = 0.306). A statistically significant time-treatment interaction was seen when comparing the pre- and post-treatment periods in groups A and B (p = 0.001, f-value = 3.16, ƞ2 = 0.251). CONCLUSION: The addition of rib mobilization to diaphragm release techniques in patients with non-specific neck pain resulted in statistically significant improvements in pain intensity, cervical flexion, right lateral rotation, left lateral rotation, right rotation, and neck flexor endurance, with moderate to large effect sizes for pain reduction and cervical motion. However, no statistically significant differences were observed between groups for cervical extension, left rotation, or the Neck Disability Index (NDI), and only a marginal clinical improvement in NDI was noted in Group A. The observed benefits in the combined intervention group may not be attributable solely to rib mobilization. The increased treatment complexity and greater therapist interaction inherent in the combined approach could also have influenced the outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT07133646.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Remotely Supervised, Home-Based Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Major Depressive Disorder: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder affects over 280 million people worldwide, and access to effective treatment remains limited. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a noninvasive option, and portable devices now allow for home-based delivery under varying degrees of remote supervision. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze the efficacy, safety, feasibility, and acceptability of home-based and remotely supervised tDCS for depressive disorders. METHODS: Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 and PRISMA-S (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses literature search extension) guidelines, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane databases, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform up to July 2025, with backward and forward citation searching. Two reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias (version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies, and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme for qualitative studies) and certainty of evidence (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation; GRADE). RESULTS: This review included 12 distinct studies (16 reports), of which 6 (50%) were randomized sham-controlled trials forming the meta-analytic pool. Active home-based tDCS produced a small, statistically significant improvement over sham (pooled Hedges g=0.36, 95% CI 0.06-0.66; P=.03; I2=34.3%). The effect was not robust to removal of the single largest positive trial (omitting the one study from 2025: g=0.39, 95% CI -0.12 to 0.91), and trial-level results were mixed: the 2 largest trials (one unsupervised [n=210] and one self-administered [n=141]) were negative on their primary depression outcomes, whereas the largest real-time supervised trial (n=174) was positive (between-group 95% CI 0.51-4.01; P=.01). This estimate was concordant in direction with an independent peer-reviewed meta-analysis of overlapping trials, which reported a pooled Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale reduction (weighted mean difference -2.74, 95% CI -4.19 to -1.29) and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale reduction (weighted mean difference -2.24, 95% CI -4.16 to -1.49), attenuating to nonsignificance (P>.05) in major depressive disorder without comorbid cognitive impairment. The pooled effect fell at or near the minimal clinically important difference. GRADE certainty was moderate. Adverse events were predominantly mild: one pilot study was terminated early for skin lesions, and one nonfatal suicide attempt occurred in an unsupervised trial. CONCLUSIONS: Home-based and remotely supervised tDCS produces a small, statistically significant but clinically modest antidepressant effect that is sensitive to the inclusion of the largest positive trial, with the 2 largest trials being negative. The available controlled evidence does not establish supervision intensity as a determinant of efficacy. Current data are insufficient to recommend routine clinical adoption; adequately powered trials with standardized supervision and longer follow-up are needed.

Humans↗