Critical Care Medicine: August 2015 - Volume 43 - Issue 8 - p 1757–1766
A monthly current awareness service for NHS Critical Care staff, produced by the Library & Knowledge Service at East Cheshire NHS Trust.
Wednesday, 5 August 2015
Efficacy of Nonpharmacological Antishivering Interventions: A Systematic Analysis
Objective:
We performed a systematic review of the published evidence regarding
nonpharmacologic antishivering interventions in various clinical settings. Data
Sources: Studies through November 2014 were identified using predefined search
terms in electronic databases, including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE:
Excerpta Medica (Ovid), and Web of Science. Study Selection: All identified
articles were critically analyzed by applying prespecified criteria. We
included experimental trials with comparable baseline data investigating the
antishivering efficacy of nonpharmacological interventions in subjects without
underlying thermoregulatory dysfunction. Data Extraction: Sixty-five
publications (3,361 subjects) were analyzed by the type of clinical setting, intervention,
comparison, and study design. In addition, each study underwent a standardized
study quality assessment. Data Synthesis: Nonpharmacological interventions
consisted of active cutaneous warming (forced-air warming, electric heating
pad/blanket, radiant heating, and water-circulating mattress), body core
warming (fluid or gas warming system), passive cutaneous warming (space
blankets or towels), and electroacupuncture. Identified clinical settings
included perioperative settings without induced hypothermia (60 of 77
comparisons), perioperative settings with induced hypothermia (8 of 77), and
induced hypothermia without anesthesia (9 of 77). Active cutaneous warming was
the most commonly studied intervention, and it was associated with the highest prevalence
of positive results when compared with controls in all three clinical settings.
In contrast, passive cutaneous warming and body core warming showed conflicting
efficacy. Comparison evaluations among different antishivering interventions
were limited due to the paucity and heterogeneity of studies directly comparing
different interventions against one another. Conclusion: This systematic review
of the effectiveness of nonpharmacological antishivering methods delineates
active cutaneous warming as the most effective nonpharmacologic antishivering
intervention in the perioperative and induced hypothermia settings.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment