ArticleHealth science reports2024
The risk of premature cardiac contractions (PAC/PVC) related to caffeine consumption among healthcare workers: A comprehensive review.
Article in Health science reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The risk of premature cardiac contractions (PAC/PVC) related to caffeine consumption among healthcare workers: A comprehensive review.Health science reports · 2024Article
- Caffeine and Arrhythmias: A Critical Analysis of Cardiovascular Responses and Arrhythmia Susceptibility.Journal of the Saudi Heart Association · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Premature atrial contractions (PACs) and premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) are ectopic heart rhythm disorders with implications for cardiovascular health. This study explores the relationship between caffeine consumption and the risk of PACs and PVCs, with a focus on healthcare workers, such as doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and midwives, who often rely on caffeine to combat fatigue, especially during night shifts. Methods: A thorough review was conducted through PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Web of Science, utilizing a combination of MeSH terms and keywords. Studies examining the link between caffeine consumption and PACs and PVCs, particularly in healthcare workers, were included. Results: We found that caffeine shows various effects based on dosage and can impact arrhythmia risk. Individuals working long shifts, including healthcare professionals, are prone to increased caffeine intake, leading to higher cardiovascular risk. To mitigate these risks, tailored guidelines for caffeine consumption, flexible shift scheduling, and mental health support services are recommended. Promoting caffeine alternatives within healthcare institutions can be beneficial. Conclusion: Although caffeine may have potential benefits, its drawbacks, particularly concerning cardiovascular health, may surpass its advantages, especially when consumed in high doses. A multidisciplinary approach is crucial for healthcare workers' well-being and quality of patient care. Further research is required to refine and support these recommendations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.