ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2026
Radial access for peripheral intervention: differences in comfort and care.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Peripheral vascular interventions (PVIs) are less invasive alternatives to surgical bypass. However, the impact of PVIs on the post-procedural quality of life of patients and workload of nurses remains unclear. Therefore, we conducted a questionnaire-based survey including patients and nurses. The patient questionnaire consisted of eight items, including intra-procedure access site pain, post-procedure access site pain, discomfort during rest time, difficulty eating, bathroom difficulties, difficulty sleeping, difficulty walking the following day, and overall procedure satisfaction. The nurses' workload questionnaire comprised seven items, including bathroom care, eating care, pain care, access-site care, post-procedure nurse call support, handling postoperative complications, and overall workload. Patients who underwent PVIs using the transradial approach expressed significantly less discomfort during the post-procedure rest time, difficulty eating, bathroom difficulties, difficulty sleeping, and difficulty walking the following day than those who underwent the transfemoral approach. Nurses found the post-procedural management of the transradial approach easier than that of the transfemoral approach, with significant differences in bathroom care, eating care, access-site care, and handling postoperative complications. Notably, the overall workload was significantly lower for the transradial approach than that for the transfemoral approach. Thus, the transradial arterial approach for PVI had advantages over the transfemoral approach in this study, including improved patient comfort and decreased nursing workload.
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.