Background: Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) is a possible adjunctive therapy applied to cardiac surgery patients to improve physical function, but the results are still controversial. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to investigate the effects of NMES on functional capacity and quality of life (QoL) in cardiac surgery patients. Methods: The following databases PubMed, Embase, Medicine, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for the English language from inception up to March 2021. A systematic targeted literature search evaluating the effects of NMES on physical function and QoL in cardiac surgery patients. The effect size of NMES was presented as the mean difference (MD)/standardized mean difference (SMD) and its 95% confidence interval using fixed/random effect models according to heterogeneity. Two reviewers independently screened and appraised each study by using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Results: Six studies were included involving 400 cardiac surgery patients. The meta-analysis showed that NMES had effect on knee extensor strength (SMD = 1.68; p = 0.05), but had no effects on 6-minute walking distance (MD = 44.08; p = 0.22), walking speed (MD = 0.05; p = 0.24), grip strength (MD = 3.01; p = 0.39), or QoL (SMD = 0.53; p = 0.19). Conclusions: NMES use in cardiac surgery patients is limited by low to moderate quality. Existing evidence shows that NMES is safe and effective for improving knee extensor strength.

Background Time in therapeutic range (TTR) is an index to assess the effectiveness of anticoagulation and is important to predict the risk of bleeding and thrombosis in patients taking warfarin. In recent years, the portable coagulation monitor, a point-of-care testing device for patients to perform self-management international normalized ratio (INR) examination, has provided an opportunity to improve the quality of oral warfarin treatment. In this study, we applied TTR to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the portable coagulation monitor for patients with oral anticoagulant warfarin after left-sided mechanical prosthetic valve (MPV) replacement. Methods It is a single-centre cohort study. From September 2019 to June 2021, a total of 243 patients who returned to our institution for outpatient clinic revisit at 3 months after left-sided MPV replacement, met the inclusion criteria and agreed to be followed up were included. Self-management group used portable coagulation monitor for INR examination, and patients in the conventional group had their INR monitored in routine outpatient visits. Clinical data of the patients would be recorded for the next 12 months, and results were compared between the two groups to assess the effect of the coagulation monitor on TTR and complications related to bleeding and thrombosis in patients with left-sided MPV replacement. Results A total of 212 individuals provided complete and validated INR data spanning of 1 year. Those who applied the portable coagulation monitor had higher TTR values and larger number of tests for INR. No significant differences were seen between the two groups in postoperative bleeding and thromboembolic complications, but portable coagulation monitor showed a trend toward fewer bleeding events. Conclusion Portable devices for coagulation monitoring are safe and can achieve a higher TTR. Patients who use the portable coagulation monitor for home INR self-management can achieve a safe and effective warfarin therapy.

No abstract