Patient comfort in percutaneous coronary interventions

References

1. 1.↵
   Ministry of Health Publication No: 988. Turkey Cardiovascular Diseases Prevention and Control Program. Action Plan (2015-2020). Ankara, T.C.. [Updated 2020; Accessed 2022 Oct]. Available from: http://www.heartcharter.eu/download/English.pdf
2. 2.
   1. Karadakovan A,
   2. Aslan FE

   . Medical Surgical Nursing Care, 3rd Ed. Academician Medical Publication Göktuğ Press, Ankara, Turkey; 2017.
3. 3.↵
   1. Murphy JG,
   2. Lloyd MA

   . Mayo Clinic Cardiology: Concise Textbook, 4th ed. Oxford University Press, New York (NY). 2015.
4. 4.↵
   World Health Organization. Preventing chronic disease: A Vital Investment. [Updated 2021; Accessed 2023 April]. Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/43314
5. 5.
   1. Nixon (lan) JV

   . Translate Editors: Kozan Ö, Keleş İ, AHA (American Hard Association) Cardiac Council, 3rd Edition, 2014.
6. 6.↵
   1. Balbay Y,
   2. Bener S,
   3. Kaygusuz T,
   4. Çay S,
   5. İlkay E.

   [Coronary revascularization (World and Türkiye examples)]. Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars 2014; 42: 245–252.

   OpenUrl
7. 7.↵
   1. Mann T,
   2. Cowper PA,
   3. Peterson ED,
   4. Cubeddu G,
   5. Bowen J,
   6. Giron L

   . Transradial coronary stenting: comparison with femoral access closed with an arterial suture device. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2000; 49: 150–156.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
8. 8.↵
   Turkey Statistical Institute. Death Causes Statistics, 2018. [Updated 2018; accessed 2019 May]. Available from: https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Olum-Nedeni-Istatistikleri-2018-30626#:~:text=%C3%96l%C3%BCm%20vakalar%C4%B1n%C4%B1n%20%38%2C4’,ile%20solunum%20sistemi%20hastal%C4%B1klar%C4%B1%20izledi.&text=%C4%B0skemik%20kalp%20hastal%C4%B1%C4%9F%C4%B1ndan%20sonra%20s%C4%B1ras%C4%B1yla,3%20ile%20hipertansif%20hastal%C4%B1klar%20g%C3%B6r%C3%BCld%C3%BC
9. 9.↵
   1. Topol E.

   1. Thomson PD

   . Preventive Cardiology. Topol E. (Eds) in Textbook of Cardiovascular Medicine. 1.Ed İstanbul: Düzey Publication; 2005. p. 1–257.
10. 10.↵
    1. Kolcaba K,
    2. Kolcaba R

    . An analysis of the concept of comfort. J Adv Nurs 1991; 16: 1301–1310.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
11. 11.↵
    1. Anjum I,
    2. Khan M,
    3. Aadil M,
    4. Faraz A,
    5. Farooqui, M,
    6. Hashmi A, et al.

    Transradial vs. transfemoral approach in cardiac catheterization: a literature review. Cureus 2017; 9: e1309.

    OpenUrl
12. 12.↵
    1. Fens AL

    . Patient Preferences for Radial versus Femoral Vascular Access Options by Coronary Angiography and Intervention (PREVAS). University of Twente, School of Management and Governance, Department of Health Technology and Services Research. Enschede, the Netherlands; 2015.
13. 13.↵
    1. Gürses B

    . Evaluation of transradial and transfemoral angioplasty applications in terms of patient comfort. Surgical Diseases Nursing Master Thesis, İstanbul, Turkey; 2017.
14. 14.↵
    1. Erdemir F,
    2. Çırlak A

    . Comfort Concept and Use in Nursing. Deuhyo Ed 2013; 6: 224–230.

    OpenUrl
15. 15.↵
    1. Tasneem S,
    2. Nazia Ilyas N

    . Levels of Pain in Patients Undergoing Coronary Invasive Procedures in Trans-Radial Versus Trans- Femoral Approaches: A Cross-Sectional Study. MNJ 2018; 10: 26–34.

    OpenUrl
16. 16.↵
    1. Jamil O,
    2. Chandra, Shukla P,
    3. Contractor S,
    4. Kumar A

    . Radial versus femoral access: is there a preference among nursing care providers? Scientific e-Posters 2019; 30: 247–248.

    OpenUrl
17. 17.↵
    1. Kolcaba K

    . Holistic comfort: Operationalizing the construct as a nurse-sensitive outcome. ANS Adv Nurs Sci 1992; 1: 1–10.

    OpenUrl
18. 18.↵
    1. Kolcaba K

    . Comfort theory and practice. a vision for holistic health care and research. Clin Nurse Spec 2005; 19: 49.

    OpenUrl
19. 19.↵
    1. Kuğuoğlu S,
    2. Karabacak Ü

    . Adaptation of general comfort scale to Turkish. Florence Nightingale J Nurs 2008; 61: 16–23.

    OpenUrl
20. 20.↵
    1. Çakır E

    . Comparison the levels of comfort and anxiety related to radial artery catheterization, İstanbul Okan University, Health Science Institute, 2019.
21. 21.↵
    1. Anuş Topdemir E

    . The Effect of Acupressure and Reiki Administration after Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy on the Pain and Comfort Levels of Patients, Inönü University, Nursing Doctora Thesis, Malatya, Turkey, 2019.
22. 22.
    1. Çalışkan T,
    2. Çınar PS

    . Does itching affect comfort in uremic patients receiving or not receiving hemodialysis treatment? Türk Nefroloji, Diyaliz ve Transplantasyon Hemşireleri Derneği, Nefrology Nursing Journal 2019;14: 84–96.

    OpenUrl
23. 23.↵
    1. Özden G

    . The effect of accepting the disease on the comfort level in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. İnönü Üniversity, Health Science Institute Master thesis, 2018.
24. 24.↵
    1. Göke G,
    2. Çınar Yücel Ş

    . The effect of back massage and hand massage on comfort and anxiety in elderly people living in nursing homes. Ege University Institute of Health Sciences, Department of Nursing Fundamentals, 2016.
25. 25.↵
    1. Reynolds S,
    2. Waterhouse K,
    3. Miller K

    . Patient care after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Dimens Crit Care Nurs 2001; 20: 44–51.

    OpenUrlPubMed
26. 26.↵
    1. Tongsai S,
    2. Thamlikitkul V

    . The safety of early versus late ambulation in the management of patients after percutaneous coronary interventions: a meta-analysis. Int J Nurs Stud 2012; 49: 1084–1090.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    1. Kara M,
    2. Işık Andsoy

    . I The Effects of Preoperative Education Before Pilonidal Sinus Surgery on Patient’s Anxiety and Comfort, Health Sciences Profession 2018; 5(3): 397–403.

    OpenUrl
28. 28.↵
    1. Wilson L,
    2. Kolcaba K

    . Practical Application of Comfort Theory In The Perianesthesia Setting. J Perianesth Nurs 2004; 62: 164–173.

    OpenUrl
29. 29.↵
    1. Huang J,
    2. Zhang D,
    3. Li SJ,
    4. Xi Y,
    5. Cui LY,
    6. Gao FL

    . Preoperative practice of surgical position reduces postoperative pain and discomfort in patients receiving kidney surgeries: a nonrandomized pilot study. Ther Clin Risk Manag 2018; 14: 1111–1114.

    OpenUrl
30. 30.↵
    1. Wang M,
    2. Liao W,
    3. Chen X

    . Effects of a short-term mindfulness- based intervention on comfort of stroke survivors undergoing inpatient rehabilitation. Rehabil Nurs 2019; 44: 78–86.

    OpenUrl
31. 31.
    1. Kolcaba K,
    2. Dimarco MA

    . Comfort Theory and its application to pediatric nursing. Pediatr Nurs 2005; 31: 187–194.

    OpenUrlPubMed
32. 32.
    1. Çarık S

    . The effect of pre-operational pain fear on post- operative pain and general comfort, Istinye University, Surgical nursing department, Istanbul, 2020.
33. 33.↵
    1. Ferrante G,
    2. Rao SV,
    3. Jüni P

    . Radial versus femoral access for coronary interventions across the entire spectrum of patients with coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2016; 9: 1419–1434.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    1. Kanei Y,
    2. Kwan T,
    3. Nakra NC

    . Transradial cardiac catheterization: a review of access site complications. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2011; 78: 840–846.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
35. 35.↵
    1. Abd-Elmaged ES,
    2. Mohammed GT,
    3. Abd-algelil A

    . Radial Versus Femoral Access For Coronary Angiography or Intervention And The Effect on The Nurses, Patients And Relatives’ Satisfaction. IOSR-JNHS 2018; 7: 17–27.

    OpenUrl
36. 36.↵
    1. Wilcoxson VL

    . Early ambulation after diagnostic cardiac catheterization via femoral artery access. J Nurse Pract 2012; 8: 810–815.

    OpenUrl
37. 37.↵
    1. Louvard YV,
    2. Lefe`vre TH,
    3. Armelle A,
    4. Marie-Claude, M

    . Coronary angiography through the radial or the femoral approach. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2001; 52: 181–187.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
38. 38.↵
    1. Kok MM,
    2. Weernink MGM,
    3. Birgelen C,
    4. Fens A,
    5. Heijden LC,
    6. Til JA

    . Patient preference for radial versus femoral vascular access for elective coronary procedures: The PREVAS study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2018; 91: 17–24.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed