Scholarlink

<p>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.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Radial access for peripheral intervention: differences in comfort and care

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月19日

查看全文
  • Takeshi Sugimoto,
  • Tomonori Miki,
  • Naotoshi Wada,
  • Shigeki Takai,
  • Noriyuki Wakana,
  • Hiroyuki Yamada,
  • Kan Zen,
  • Satoaki Matoba

摘要

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.