A randomised controlled trial comparing the use of manual versus mechanical compression to obtain haemostasis following coronary angiography

Jones, T. and McCutcheon, H. (2003) A randomised controlled trial comparing the use of manual versus mechanical compression to obtain haemostasis following coronary angiography. Intensive and Critical Care Nursing, 19 1: 11-20. doi:10.1016/S0964-3397(03)00005-3


Author Jones, T.
McCutcheon, H.
Title A randomised controlled trial comparing the use of manual versus mechanical compression to obtain haemostasis following coronary angiography
Journal name Intensive and Critical Care Nursing   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 0964-3397
1532-4036
Publication date 2003-02-01
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1016/S0964-3397(03)00005-3
Open Access Status Not Open Access
Volume 19
Issue 1
Start page 11
End page 20
Total pages 10
Place of publication London, United Kingdom
Publisher Churchill Livingstone
Language eng
Formatted abstract
Cardiac interventions have become a commonly accepted treatment option for patients with coronary heart disease. Managing the arterial puncture site and femoral sheath removal is an important aspect of cardiac nursing practice for patients who have had cardiac diagnostic and interventional procedures. The purpose of this study was to compare the use of manual compression with a mechanical compression device in achieving haemostasis after femoral sheath removal in coronary angiography patients and to determine the ability of these two techniques to reduce groin complications. A randomised controlled trial comparing two compression protocols (manual and QuicKlamp™) was undertaken on a sample of 100 patients scheduled to have coronary angiography. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse and describe the data. Inter-group comparisons were analysed using either Chi-squared analysis for nominal data, or the Mann-Whitney U-test for continuous variables. The results indicated that the QuicKlamp™ device took longer to effect haemostasis after femoral sheath removal (P = 0.000) and subjects took longer to mobilise than after manual compression (P = 0.001). More haematomas occurred following manual compression after pressure dressing removal (P = 0.027). At 5-day follow-up, more bruising was identified in those subjects in the QuicKlamp™ compression group (P = 0.046), as was swelling in female subjects (P = 0.044). More episodes of chest pain at 5-day follow-up were identified in the manual compression group (P = 0.014). The findings demonstrate that QuicKlamp™ mechanical compression is a safe alternative to manual compression for attaining haemostasis after femoral sheath removal.
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status Non-UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collection: School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: Scopus Citation Count Cited 9 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Wed, 18 Nov 2015, 19:34:37 EST by Vicki Percival on behalf of School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work