Slow versus fast subcutaneous heparin injections for prevention of bruising and site pain intensity.

BACKGROUND: Heparin is an anticoagulant medication that is usually injected subcutaneously. Subcutaneous administration of heparin may result in complications such as bruising, haematoma, and pain at the injection site. One of the factors that may affect pain, haematoma, and bruising is injection speed. Several studies have been carried out to determine if speed of injection affects the amount of pain and bruising where the injection is given; however, the results of these studies have differed, and study authors have not reached a clear final conclusion. This is the second update of a review first published in 2014. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of duration (speed) of subcutaneous heparin injection on pain and bruising at the injection site in people admitted to hospitals or clinics who require treatment with unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). We also looked at haematoma at the injection site. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 22 June 2020. We undertook reference checking of included studies to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of different durations of subcutaneous injection of heparin on pain, bruising, and haematoma at the injection site. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For this update, two review authors independently selected studies and extracted data via Covidence software and assessed methodological quality using Cochrane's risk of bias tool. The primary outcomes of interest were pain intensity at injection site and size and incidence of bruising. The secondary outcomes of interest were size and incidence of haematoma at injection site. We calculated the odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), or standardised mean difference (SMD) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We identified one new study for this update, resulting in a total of five included studies with 503 participants who received subcutaneous injections of LMWH into the abdomen. Given the nature of the intervention, it was not possible to blind participants and caregivers (personnel) in any of the included studies. Two studies described blinding of outcome assessors. Overall, the methodological quality of included studies was moderate. The duration of the fast injection was 10 seconds, and the duration of the slow injection was 30 seconds in all included studies. Four studies reported site pain intensity after each injection at different time points. Two studies assessed site pain intensity immediately after each injection; meta-analysis showed no evidence of a difference in site pain intensity immediately after slow injection when compared to fast injection (MD -1.52, 95% CI -3.56 to 0.53; 140 participants; low-certainty evidence). Meta-analysis of three studies indicated that site pain intensity may be slightly reduced 48 hours after the slow heparin injection compared to fast injection (MD -1.60, 95% CI -2.69 to -0.51; 103 participants; low-certainty evidence). Five studies assessed bruise size at 48 hours, and two studies assessed bruise size at 60 hours. Meta-analysis showed there may be a reduction in bruise size 48 hours (SMD -0.54, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.02; 503 participants; 5 studies; very low-certainty evidence) and 60 hours (SMD -0.49, 95% CI -0.93 to -0.06; 84 participants; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence) after slow injection compared to fast injection. There was no evidence of a difference in bruise size 72 hours after slow injection compared to fast injection (SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.06; 140 participants; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). Three studies evaluated incidence of bruising and showed there may be a reduction in bruise incidence 48 hours (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.60; 444 participants; low-certainty evidence) and 60 hours (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.65; 84 participants; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence) after slow injection compared to fast injection. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence due to risk of bias concerns, imprecision, and inconsistency. None of the included studies measured size or incidence of haematoma. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Administering medication safely and enhancing patient comfort are the main aims of clinical nurses. In this review, we identified five RCTs that evaluated the effect of subcutaneous heparin injection duration on pain intensity, bruise size and incidence. We found that pain may be slightly reduced 48 hours after slow injection. Similarly, there may be a reduction in bruise size and incidence after slow injection compared to fast injection 48 and 60 hours postinjection. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes to low or very low due to risk of bias concerns, imprecision, and inconsistency. Accordingly, new trials with a more robust design, more participants, and a focus on different injection speeds will be useful in strengthening the certainty of the available evidence.

Effect of Cold Application on Bruising and Pain Following Heparin Subcutaneous Injection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PURPOSE: We performed this review systematically to assess the effect of cold application at the heparin subcutaneous injection site on incidence and size of bruising, hematoma, and pain intensity. DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis were utilized as the study design. DATA SOURCES: To retrieve the relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to July 2019, the databases of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, TRIP, and Elmnet.ir were searched. REVIEW METHODS: Those RCTs were selected in which the participants had received any type of heparin via subcutaneous injections at least once a day, as were those comparing the effect of cold application (i.e., moist or dry ice packs or vapocoolant spray) on injection sites with no interventions or placebos. The types of outcomes measured included pain intensity, bruising, and hematoma at injection sites. Furthermore, odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were employed to measure the pooled data. RESULTS: A total of nine studies recruiting 896 patients with a mean age range of 37 to 62 years were ultimately included in this study. The findings revealed that eight studies had used low-molecular-weight heparin, but unfractionated heparin had been administered in one study. The quality of the studies was also assessed in seven domains. Overall, risk of bias in the included articles was low to moderate. Pooling data of six studies showed that the patients had experienced less pain intensity once cold had been applied at the heparin injection sites (MD = -1.67; 95% CI -3.03 to -0.31; p = .02; I2 = 92%). Bruising had been correspondingly reported in eight and six studies in terms of size and incidence, respectively. In particular, the results had demonstrated no statistically significant difference between either group in terms of bruising size or incidence at 48 to 72 hr following heparin injection. Furthermore, hematoma incidence had been reported in two studies, and one trial had reported hematoma size only. The results had suggested that the patients had smaller hematomas (MD = -0.87; 95% CI -1.63 to -0.11; p = .03) and a lower incidence of hematomas (OR = 0.35; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.76; p = .008) in the cold application group 48 hr after injection. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis showed that patients could experience less pain and fewer hematomas once the cold had been applied for 3 to 5 min at the injection sites before or after subcutaneous heparin administration. During this period, clinicians should also consider the patient's comfort; if some patients feel discomfort at the cold application site, the minimum possible time should be considered. CLINICAL REVERENCE: This study's results could be used as evidence for all hospitalized and outpatients who need to receive any form of heparin and may suffer from local complications of this medicine.

Effect of omega-3 supplements on vasomotor symptoms in menopausal women: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to investigate the effect of omega-3 supplements on relief of vasomotor symptoms among menopausal women. STUDY DESIGN: The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, EMBASE, ProQuest, Google Scholar, Web of Science, CINAHL, IranMedex and SID databases were searched until September 2017. Inclusion criteria were (1) women were experiencing vasomotor symptoms in the menopause period, (2) intervention was omega-3 supplements (3) randomized controlled trial (RCT) or quasi-RCT, and (4) outcome measures included changes in the frequency and severity of hot flush or night sweats, sleep problems and side effects. RESULTS: Three randomized controlled trials involving 483 women in the age range of 51 to 54.7 years were included in the review. Overall, the risk of bias in the included studies was moderate. All the participants were found to be blinded. Meta-analysis of the data showed no difference in the frequency and severity of hot flushes, insomnia severity, sleep quality, quality of life and adverse effects between the two groups. Compared to placebo group, women who received omega-3 supplements experienced lower frequency (mean difference: -1.82, 95% CI: -2.81, -0.83) and severity (mean difference: -.89, 95% CI: -1.25, -0.53) of night sweats. CONCLUSIONS: RCTs which investigate the impact of omega-3 supplements on vasomotor symptoms in menopausal women are scarce. A comprehensive search in a wide range of databases found only three relevant papers. Our analysis suggests that omega-3 supplements may alleviate night sweats but have no benefit in reducing hot flushes, or improving sleep quality and quality of life during the menopausal period. We recommend high quality RCTs along with a longer follow-up period to investigate this important subject, as there was insufficient evidence to conclude that omega-3 supplements are of benefit in alleviating vasomotor symptoms in menopausal women.

Slow versus fast subcutaneous heparin injections for prevention of bruising and site pain intensity.

BACKGROUND: Heparin is an anticoagulant medication that is usually injected subcutaneously. Subcutaneous administration of heparin may result in complications such as bruising, haematoma, and pain at the injection site. One of the factors that may affect pain, haematoma, and bruising is injection speed. For patients and healthcare providers, strategies that can reduce pain and bruising are considered important. Reducing patients' discomfort and concerns whenever and wherever possible is an important aim of nursing. Several studies have been carried out to see if speed of injection affects the amount of pain and bruising where the injection is given, but results of these studies have differed and study authors have not reached a clear final conclusion. This is the first update of the review first published in 2014. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of duration (speed) of subcutaneous heparin injection on pain, haematoma, and bruising at the injection site in people admitted to hospitals or clinics who require treatment with unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). SEARCH METHODS: For this update, the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist (CIS) searched the Specialised Register (last searched March 2017) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 2). The CIS also searched trials registries for details of ongoing or unpublished studies. Review authors searched two Persian databases - Iranmedex and Scientific Information Database (SID) - as well as Google Scholar. SELECTION CRITERIA: We sought randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of different durations of subcutaneous injection of heparin on pain, bruising, and haematoma at the injection site. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors (MM, LJ), working independently, extracted data onto a structured form and assessed study quality. We used the criteria recommended by Cochrane to assess the risk of bias of included studies. For the outcomes, we calculated the mean difference (MD) or the standardised MD (SMD) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We pooled data using fixed-effect and random-effects models. We used GRADE to assess the overall quality of evidence supporting outcomes assessed in this review. MAIN RESULTS: For this update, we identified three new studies and therefore included in the Review four studies with a total of 459 participants who received subcutaneous injections of LMWH into the abdomen. Only one trial reported the injected drug volume (0.4 mL). Owing to the nature of the intervention, it was not possible to blind participants and care givers (personnel) in any included study. Two studies described blinding of outcome assessors; therefore overall, the methodological quality of included studies was moderate. The duration of the fast injection was 10 seconds and the duration of the slow injection was 30 seconds in all included studies.Three studies reported site pain intensity after each injection at different time points. Two studies assessed site pain intensity immediately after each injection, and meta-analysis on 140 participants showed no clear difference in site pain intensity immediately post slow injection when compared to fast injection (low-quality evidence; P = 0.15). In contrast, meta-analysis of two studies with 59 participants showed that 48 hours after the heparin injection, slow injection was associated with less pain intensity compared to fast injection (low-quality evidence; P = 0.007). One study (40 participants) reported pain intensity at 60 and 72 hours after injection. This study described no clear difference in site pain intensity at 60 and 72 hours post slow injection compared to fast injection.All four included studies assessed bruise size at 48 hours after each injection. Meta-analysis on 459 participants showed no difference in bruise size after slow injection compared to fast injection (low-quality evidence; P = 0.07). None of the included studies measured the incidence of haematoma as an outcome. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found four RCTs that evaluated the effect of subcutaneous heparin injection duration on pain intensity and bruise size. Owing to the small numbers of participants, we found insufficient evidence to determine any effect on pain intensity immediately after injection or at 60 and 72 hours post injection. However, slow injection may reduce site pain intensity 48 hours after injection (low-quality evidence). We observed no clear difference in bruise size after slow injection compared to fast injection (low-quality evidence). We judged this evidence to be of low quality owing to imprecision and inconsistency.

Slow versus fast subcutaneous heparin injections for prevention of bruising and site pain intensity.

BACKGROUND: Heparin is an anticoagulant medication that is usually injected subcutaneously. Subcutaneous administration of heparin may result in complications such as bruising, haematoma, and pain at the injection site. One of the factors that may affect pain, haematoma, and bruising is injection speed. For patients and healthcare providers, strategies that can reduce pain and bruising are considered important. Reducing patients' discomfort and concerns whenever and wherever possible is an important aim of nursing. Several studies have been carried out to see if speed of injection affects the amount of pain and bruising where the injection is given, but results of these studies have differed and study authors have not reached a clear final conclusion. This is the first update of the review first published in 2014. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of duration (speed) of subcutaneous heparin injection on pain, haematoma, and bruising at the injection site in people admitted to hospitals or clinics who require treatment with unfractionated heparin (UFH) or low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). SEARCH METHODS: For this update, the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist (CIS) searched the Specialised Register (last searched March 2017) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 2). The CIS also searched trials registries for details of ongoing or unpublished studies. Review authors searched two Persian databases - Iranmedex and Scientific Information Database (SID) - as well as Google Scholar. SELECTION CRITERIA: We sought randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of different durations of subcutaneous injection of heparin on pain, bruising, and haematoma at the injection site. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors (MM, LJ), working independently, extracted data onto a structured form and assessed study quality. We used the criteria recommended by Cochrane to assess the risk of bias of included studies. For the outcomes, we calculated the mean difference (MD) or the standardised MD (SMD) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We pooled data using fixed-effect and random-effects models. We used GRADE to assess the overall quality of evidence supporting outcomes assessed in this review. MAIN RESULTS: For this update, we identified three new studies and therefore included in the Review four studies with a total of 459 participants who received subcutaneous injections of LMWH into the abdomen. Only one trial reported the injected drug volume (0.4 mL). Owing to the nature of the intervention, it was not possible to blind participants and care givers (personnel) in any included study. Two studies described blinding of outcome assessors; therefore overall, the methodological quality of included studies was moderate. The duration of the fast injection was 10 seconds and the duration of the slow injection was 30 seconds in all included studies.Three studies reported site pain intensity after each injection at different time points. Two studies assessed site pain intensity immediately after each injection, and meta-analysis on 140 participants showed no clear difference in site pain intensity immediately post slow injection when compared to fast injection (low-quality evidence; P = 0.15). In contrast, meta-analysis of two studies with 59 participants showed that 48 hours after the heparin injection, slow injection was associated with less pain intensity compared to fast injection (low-quality evidence; P = 0.007). One study (40 participants) reported pain intensity at 60 and 72 hours after injection. This study described no clear difference in site pain intensity at 60 and 72 hours post slow injection compared to fast injection.All four included studies assessed bruise size at 48 hours after each injection. Meta-analysis on 459 participants showed no difference in bruise size after slow injection compared to fast injection (low-quality evidence; P = 0.07). None of the included studies measured the incidence of haematoma as an outcome. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found four RCTs that evaluated the effect of subcutaneous heparin injection duration on pain intensity and bruise size. Owing to the small numbers of participants, we found insufficient evidence to determine any effect on pain intensity immediately after injection or at 60 and 72 hours post injection. However, slow injection may reduce site pain intensity 48 hours after injection (low-quality evidence). We observed no clear difference in bruise size after slow injection compared to fast injection (low-quality evidence). We judged this evidence to be of low quality owing to imprecision and inconsistency.

Slow versus fast subcutaneous heparin injections for prevention of bruising and site-pain intensity.

BACKGROUND: Heparin is an anticoagulant medication that is normally injected subcutaneously. Subcutaneous administration of heparin may result in complications such as bruising, haematoma and pain at the injection site. One of the factors that may affect pain, haematoma and bruising is injection speed. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of the duration (speed) of subcutaneous heparin injection on pain, haematoma and bruising at the injection site in people admitted to hospitals or clinics who require treatment with unfractionated heparin or low molecular weight heparin. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched August 2013) and CENTRAL (2013, Issue 7). We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and two Persian databases Iranmedex and SID (August 2013). SELECTION CRITERIA: We sought randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of different durations of subcutaneous injections of heparin on pain, bruising and haematoma at the injection site. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors, working independently, extracted data onto a structured form and assessed study quality. We used the criteria recommended by the Cochrane Handbook to assess the quality of included studies. The study outcomes were summarised using quantitative and qualitative methods. MAIN RESULTS: One RCT was identified which met the inclusion criteria, involving 50 participants with a mean age of 55.25 (± 12.37) years. In this trial it was not possible to blind the participants and care givers. The method of sequence generation and allocation concealment was not described. The overall quality of the evidence was moderate due to the single small included study. Each participant had two injections, one in the left side and one in right side of the abdomen. One of these was injected slowly (intervention) and the other was injected fast (control). The second injection was 12 hours after the first injection. The duration of fast injection was 10 seconds and the duration of slow injection was 30 seconds. The study reported a significantly lower pain intensity for slow versus fast injection. The mean pain intensity was 13.9 ± 17.1 mm with the slow injection and 20.6 ± 22.3 mm with the fast injection (P < 0.001). In addition the bruising sizes were smaller with slow injections compared to fast injections at 48 hours follow-up (mean bruising size 18.76 ± 9.32 mm(2) with the slow injection and 109.2 ± 468.66 mm(2) with the fast injection, P = 0.033) and 72 hours follow-up (mean bruising size 21.72 ± 76.16 mm(2) with the slow injection and 110.12 ± 472.86 mm(2) with the fast injection, P = 0.025). The incidence of haematoma was not measured as an outcome. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is only limited evidence of any difference in pain intensity and bruising sizes following slow versus fast injections due to the inclusion of only one small unblinded trial. The single included study suggests that slow injection might have slightly lower pain intensity and bruising size at the heparin injection site, but the results should be considered with caution. Until more reliable evidence emerges, slow injection might be the preferred approach.

Early ambulation after diagnostic transfemoral catheterisation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Femoral arterial puncture is the most common method of vascular access for angiography. Because of possible vascular events, all patients are restricted to strict immobilisation and bed rest for 2-24h, which is accompanied by back pain and discomfort. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of the duration of bed rest after transfemoral catheterisation on the prevention of vascular complications and general discomfort, pain, urinary discomfort and patient satisfaction. DATA SOURCES: We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, CINAHL, Proquest Dissertations, Open SIGLE, Iranmedex and Irandoc. STUDY SELECTION: We included blinded or unblinded randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised controlled trials that used two different durations of bed rest after angiography before the ambulation was permitted. DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers separately assessed the quality of each study and extracted the data. We present dichotomous outcomes as odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and continuous outcomes as mean differences with 95% CI. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty studies involving a total of 4019 participants with a mean age of 59.5 years were included. The studies considered periods of bed rest ranging from 2 to 24h, which we compared in three main categories. There were no statistically significant differences between categories in the incidence of bleeding, haematoma, bruising, pseudoaneurysm, thrombus or arteriovenous fistula. Back pain intensity was assessed in four studies. Patients had significantly less back pain after 2-4h bed rest compared to 6h bed rest at 2h (mean difference: -0.70, 95% CI: -1.07, -0.32), 4h (mean difference: -0.60, 95% CI: -0.96, -0.24) and 6h of follow-up (mean difference: -3.77, 95% CI: -4.48, -2.92). One study that assessed urinary discomfort reported less urinary discomfort when bed rest lasted 4h compared to 12-24h (mean difference: -1.48; 95% CI: -2.37, -0.59). In addition, reduced bed rest time may significantly decrease the costs of hospital care. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review suggests that patients can be ambulated after 2-3h following transfemoral catheterisation, and that early ambulation had no significant effect on the incidence of vascular complications and may reduce back pain and urinary discomfort.

Bed rest duration after sheath removal following percutaneous coronary interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To explore the effect of bed rest duration after sheath removal following percutaneous coronary interventions on the incidence of vascular complications, back pain and urinary problems. BACKGROUND: According to the literature, the duration of bed rest after sheath removal following percutaneous coronary interventions ranges from 2-24 hours. Several studies have assessed the effect of duration of bed rest on vascular complications, but a clear final conclusion about the exact duration of bed rest has not been reached. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, CINAHL, IranMedex and IranDoc were searched. No language limitation was applied. RCTs that used two different periods for ambulation were included. Two reviewers separately assessed the quality of each included study and extracted the data. Dichotomous outcomes were recorded as odds ratio with 95% confidence interval. RESULTS: Five studies involving 1115 participants were included in the review. Among them, two studies had three comparison groups. The studies considered a variety of periods as early and late ambulation, ranging from 2-10 hours. Totally, there were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of bleeding, pseudoaneurysm, arteriovenous fistula and urinary problems between early and late ambulation. There was a statistically significant reduction in the risk of haematoma formation at four to six hours of bed rest compared with eight hours of bed rest (odds ratio = 0·37, 95% CI: 0·15, 0·91). Back pain was reported in one study evaluating three hours of bed rest with an odds ratio of 0·45 (95% confidence interval: 0·28, 0·71) when compared with 10 hours of bed rest. CONCLUSIONS: Early ambulation after percutaneous coronary interventions is safe and feasible; however, the results should be used with caution as the majority of included studies had methodological flaws. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The results of this study suggest that patients could be ambulated three to four hours after sheath removal following percutaneous coronary interventions and early ambulation dose does not increase the risk of vascular complications, but it moderates back pain occurrence.