scholarly journals Comparison of the EasyWarm® self-heating blanket with the Cocoon forced-air warming blanket in preventing intraoperative hypothermia

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 169-174
Author(s):  
Hosim Prasai Thapa ◽  
Amanda J Kerton ◽  
Philip J Peyton
Keyword(s):  
Elective Surgery ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Perioperative Period ◽  
Ease Of Use ◽  
Self Heating ◽  
Intraoperative Hypothermia ◽  
Forced Air Warming ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Forced Air

The importance of preventing hypothermia in the perioperative period cannot be overemphasised. The use of active warming devices is advocated and practised widely. The forced-air warming (FAW) blanket is currently a popular modality. The BARRIER® EasyWarm® (Mölnlycke Healthcare, Belrose, Australia) self-heating blanket, which does not require a power unit, has been proposed as an easy-to-use alternative to the FAW blanket. We conducted a single-centre, randomized controlled trial to compare the efficacy of the EasyWarm® self-heating blanket to the Cocoon blanket (Care Essentials, North Geelong, Australia), a conventional FAW blanket, in preventing intraoperative hypothermia. Forty patients undergoing elective surgery under general anaesthesia lasting >1 h were randomized in a 1:1 ratio. Prewarming was not allowed; 39 patients were analysed (19 EasyWarm® group and 20 Cocoon blanket group). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups with regard to the mean (±standard deviation) final nasopharyngeal temperature (35.89 ± 0.82 °C versus 35.74 ± 0.77 °C; P = 0.72 in the Cocoon and EasyWarm® blanket groups, respectively). Similarly, the difference between average temperatures at 1, 2 and 3 h was not statistically significant. We found the EasyWarm® blanket to be as effective as the Cocoon FAW blanket in preventing intraoperative hypothermia. Due to its ease of use, the EasyWarm® blanket may have an additional benefit in preoperative warming of patients.

scholarly journals Randomized clinical study comparing active heating methods for prevention of intraoperative hypothermia in gastroenterology

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Regina Maria da Silva Feu Santos ◽  
Ilka de Fatima Santana Ferreira Boin ◽  
Cristina Aparecida Arivabene Caruy ◽  
Eliane de Araújo Cintra ◽  
Nathalia Agostini Torres ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Categorical Variables ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Randomized Clinical Study ◽  
Intraoperative Hypothermia ◽  
Forced Air Warming ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Chi Square Test ◽  
Intraoperative Period ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Times

ABSTRACT Objective: to compare the efficacy of three active heating methods in the prevention of intraoperative hypothermia in open gastroenterological surgeries. Method: randomized clinical trial with a sample of 75 patients, whose initial body temperature measured by a tympanic thermometer. Esophageal temperature <36ºC was considered hypothermic. Patients were divided into three groups using: thermal mattress, underbody forced-air warming blanket and heated infusion system. The tympanic and esophageal temperatures were measured at different times of the intraoperative period, but the temperature considered gold standard was the esophageal. To evaluate the homogeneity of the groups, we used chi-square test (categorical variables). In the comparison of temperature measurements over time, the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the contrast profile test were used for the difference in temperature between the times. The non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compare the three groups. The level of significance was 5%. Results: regarding the studied variables, the groups were not homogeneous as to the categorical variable sex. All patients presented hypothermia during the intraoperative period (p> 0.05). Conclusion: there was no significant difference between the heating methods in the prevention of intraoperative hypothermia. REBEC - Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (RBR- no. 52shjp).

scholarly journals Effects of 10-min of pre-warming on inadvertent perioperative hypothermia in intraoperative warming patients: a randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 356-364
Author(s):  
Jae Hwa Yoo ◽  
Si Young Ok ◽  
Sang Ho Kim ◽  
Ji Won Chung ◽  
Sun Young Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Body Temperature ◽  
Thermal Comfort ◽  
Elective Surgery ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Perioperative Period ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Perioperative Hypothermia ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Forced Air

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of 10-min pre-warming in preventing inadvertent perioperative hypothermia, which is defined as a reduction in body temperature to less than 36.0℃ during the perioperative period in intraoperative warming patients. Methods: In this prospective randomized study, 60 patients scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia lasting less than 120 min were divided into two groups: the 10-min pre-warming group (n = 30) and the control group (n = 30). Patients in the 10-min pre-warming group were pre-warmed for 10 min in the pre-anesthetic area using a forced-air warmer set at 47ºC. Intraoperatively, we warmed all patients with a forced-air warmer. Body temperature was measured using a tympanic membrane thermometer pre- or postoperatively and a nasopharyngeal temperature probe intraoperatively. Patients were evaluated on the shivering and thermal comfort scale in the pre-anesthetic area and post-anesthesia care unit. Results: The incidences of intraoperative hypothermia and postoperative hypothermia were similar in both groups (10.7% vs. 28.6%, P = 0.177; 10.7% vs. 10.7%, P = 1.000 respectively). Body temperature was higher in the 10-min pre-warming group (P = 0.003). Thermal comfort during the pre-warming period was higher in the 10-min pre-warming group (P < 0.001). However, postoperative thermal comfort and shivering grades of both groups were similar.Conclusions: Ten minutes of pre-warming has no additional effect on the prevention of inadvertent perioperative hypothermia in intraoperative warming patients.

scholarly journals Thermal suit connected to a forced‐air warming unit for preventing intraoperative hypothermia: A randomised controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sirkka‐Liisa Lauronen ◽  
Marja‐Tellervo Mäkinen ◽  
Päivi Annila ◽  
Heini Huhtala ◽  
Arvi Yli‐Hankala ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intraoperative Hypothermia ◽  
Forced Air Warming ◽  
Forced Air ◽  
Randomised Controlled

scholarly journals Usefulness of applying research reporting guidelines as Writing Aid software: a crossover randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. e030943 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dana Hawwash ◽  
Melissa K Sharp ◽  
Alemayehu Argaw ◽  
Patrick Kolsteren ◽  
Carl Lachat
Keyword(s):  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Ease Of Use ◽  
Perceived Usefulness ◽  
Reporting Guidelines ◽  
Perceived Ease Of Use ◽  
Research Reporting ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Randomised Controlled

ObjectivesTo assess the intention of using a Writing Aid software, which integrates four research reporting guidelines (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology and STrengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology-nutritional epidemiology) and their Elaboration & Explanation (E&E) documents during the write-up of research in Microsoft Word compared with current practices.DesignTwo-arms crossover randomised controlled trial with no blinding and no washout period.SettingFace-to-face or online sessions.Participants54 (28 in arm 1 and 26 in arm 2) doctoral and postdoctoral researchers.InterventionsReporting guidelines and their E&E document were randomly administered as Writing Aid or as Word documents in a single 30 min to 1 hour session, with a short break before crossing over to the other study intervention.Primary and secondary outcomesUsing the Technology Acceptance Model, we assessed the primary outcome: the difference in the mean of intention of use; and secondary outcomes: the difference in mean perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness. The three outcomes were measured using questions with a 7-point Likert-scale. Secondary analysis using structural equation modelling (SEM) was applied to explore the relationships between the outcomes.ResultsNo significant difference in reported intention of use (mean difference and 95% CI 0.25 (–0.05 to 0.55), p=0.10), and perceived usefulness (mean difference and 95% CI 0.19 (–0.04 to 0.41), p=0.10). The Writing Aid performed significantly better than the word document on researchers’ perceived ease of use (mean difference and 95% CI 0.59 (0.29 to 0.89), p<0.001). In the SEM analysis, participants’ intention of using the tools was indirectly affected by perceived ease of use (beta 0.53 p=0.002).ConclusionsDespite no significant difference in the intention of use between the tools, administering reporting guidelines as Writing Aid is perceived as easier to use, offering a possibility to further explore its applicability to enhance reporting adherence.

scholarly journals A double-blind randomized controlled trial of topical Curcuma xanthorrhiza Roxb. on mild psoriasis: clinical manifestations, histopathological features, and K6 expressions

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 178-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Githa Rahmayunita ◽  
Tjut N.A. Jacoeb ◽  
Endi Novianto ◽  
Wresti Indriatmi ◽  
Rahadi Rihatmadja ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Clinical Manifestations ◽  
Effective Treatment Option ◽  
Psoriasis Area Severity Index ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Old Patients ◽  
Mean Values ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Curcuma Xanthorrhiza ◽  
The Difference

Background: Curcuma xanthorrhiza Roxb. exerts its anti-inflammatory effects by reducing the concentration of IL-6, IL-8, and phosphorylase kinase, which has role in keratinocyte proliferation. Our study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of C. xanthorrhiza in psoriasis.Methods: From 18 to 59 year-old patients with mild psoriasis, 2 similar lesions were selected. The severity assessment was based on the psoriasis area severity index (PASI), Trozak score, and K6 expression. Using a double-blinded randomized method, lesion was treated with 1% C. xanthorrhiza ointment vs placebo for 4 weeks. The results were analyzed by the chi-square test using STATATM V.12 software (Stata Corp.).Results: The study was conducted in 2010 to 2012 with 17 subjects participated. The median of PASI score were reduced significantly in both lesions, either treated with 1% C. xanthorrhiza ointment vs placebo; however when compared between the group, it was not significant (p=0.520). The Trozak score were reduced in lesions treated with 1% C. xanthorrhiza ointment; but it was not significant (p = 0.306). In lesions treated with placebo, the Trozak score was increased significantly. The difference of Trozak score between lesions treated with C. xanthorrhiza and placebo was significant (p=0.024). There was no significant difference of K6 expression in lesions treated with 1% C. xanthorrhiza ointments or placebo as well as on the difference of mean values of K6 expression between the group (p=0.827).Conclusion: Based on the results, 1% C. xanthorrhiza ointment is effective treatment option for mild psoriasis, but longer follow-up period is suggested to confirm this results. C. xanthorrhiza ointment is safe for topical administration as there were no side effects reported in this study.

scholarly journals Age Is Not a Barrier: Older Adults With Cancer Derive Similar Benefit in a Randomized Controlled Trial of a Remote Symptom Monitoring Intervention Compared With Younger Adults

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 107327482096887
Author(s):  
Lorinda A. Coombs ◽  
Lee Ellington ◽  
Angela Fagerlin ◽  
Kathi Mooney
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Interactive Voice Response ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Ease Of Use ◽  
Younger Adults ◽  
Symptom Monitoring ◽  
Adult Participants ◽  
Perceived Benefit ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Technological Tool

This study investigated a remote symptom monitoring intervention to examine if older participants with cancer received a similar magnitude of benefit compared with younger adults with cancer. We analyzed a longitudinal symptom monitoring intervention for 358 participants beginning a new course of chemotherapy treatment in community and academic oncology practices. The study design was a randomized control trial; participants were randomized to the intervention or usual care, the intervention was delivered during daily automated coaching. Older adults with moderate and severe symptoms derived similar benefit as those adults younger than 60 years of age, adherence to the study protocol which involved daily calls was high. There was no significant difference between the 2 age categories; on average, older adult participants made 88% of expected daily calls and younger adult participants made 90% of expected daily calls. Our results challenge the perception that older adults are unwilling or unable to use a technological tool such as interactive voice response and suggest that patient utilization may be guided by other factors, such as ease of use and perceived benefit from the intervention.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document