Clinical Practice Patterns for Transradial Coronary Artery Catheterisation in Australian and New Zealand: Mixed-Methods Survey and Interview Study

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
{"title":"Clinical Practice Patterns for Transradial Coronary Artery Catheterisation in Australian and New Zealand: Mixed-Methods Survey and Interview Study","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.hlc.2024.03.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>While there has been an increase in the use of the transradial approach when performing percutaneous coronary angiography and intervention, there is evidence of variations in international practice. Ensuring that operators’ practices are supported by evidence is important to ensure optimal outcomes.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>Interventional cardiologists and advanced trainees completed a cross-sectional survey followed by semi-structured interviews to map current practices for transradial coronary artery procedures in Australia and New Zealand and explore factors that influence clinical decision-making around procedural practice.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The right radial artery was the preferred access site (88%). Over a third (37%) of the participants indicated that they tested the hand circulation pre-procedure. Over a quarter of respondents (28.6%) reported that they would carry out transradial procedures regardless of the patient’s coagulation status. Most participants (77.8%) described radial artery spasm in around 10% of transradial procedures performed. Only 62% of participants assessed for radial artery occlusion post-catheterisation. Interview data revealed four themes that guided clinical decision-making, namely (1) Decision-making based on research, (2) Using clinical experience, (3) Being led by their training, and (4) Individual patient factors.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This study has demonstrated that despite clinical guidelines, substantial practice variation exists in transradial coronary artery catheterisation across Australia and New Zealand. The variation in practice and factors impacting clinical decision-making highlight a need for future strategies to optimise evidence translation and implementation across clinical settings.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":13000,"journal":{"name":"Heart, Lung and Circulation","volume":"33 9","pages":"Pages 1280-1286"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1443950624001719/pdfft?md5=5b1a9c52c315db6faefc1b8110cb2b4b&pid=1-s2.0-S1443950624001719-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart, Lung and Circulation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1443950624001719","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

While there has been an increase in the use of the transradial approach when performing percutaneous coronary angiography and intervention, there is evidence of variations in international practice. Ensuring that operators’ practices are supported by evidence is important to ensure optimal outcomes.

Method

Interventional cardiologists and advanced trainees completed a cross-sectional survey followed by semi-structured interviews to map current practices for transradial coronary artery procedures in Australia and New Zealand and explore factors that influence clinical decision-making around procedural practice.

Results

The right radial artery was the preferred access site (88%). Over a third (37%) of the participants indicated that they tested the hand circulation pre-procedure. Over a quarter of respondents (28.6%) reported that they would carry out transradial procedures regardless of the patient’s coagulation status. Most participants (77.8%) described radial artery spasm in around 10% of transradial procedures performed. Only 62% of participants assessed for radial artery occlusion post-catheterisation. Interview data revealed four themes that guided clinical decision-making, namely (1) Decision-making based on research, (2) Using clinical experience, (3) Being led by their training, and (4) Individual patient factors.

Conclusions

This study has demonstrated that despite clinical guidelines, substantial practice variation exists in transradial coronary artery catheterisation across Australia and New Zealand. The variation in practice and factors impacting clinical decision-making highlight a need for future strategies to optimise evidence translation and implementation across clinical settings.

澳大利亚和新西兰经桡动脉冠状动脉导管术的临床实践模式:混合方法调查与访谈研究》。
背景:虽然经皮冠状动脉造影和介入治疗中经桡动脉入路的使用越来越多,但有证据表明国际上的做法存在差异。确保操作者的实践有据可依对保证最佳治疗效果非常重要:方法:介入心脏病专家和高级受训人员完成了一项横断面调查,随后进行了半结构式访谈,以了解澳大利亚和新西兰经桡动脉冠状动脉手术的当前做法,并探讨影响手术做法临床决策的因素:结果:右桡动脉是首选的入路部位(88%)。超过三分之一(37%)的受访者表示在术前测试过手部循环。超过四分之一的受访者(28.6%)表示,无论患者的凝血状态如何,他们都会进行经桡动脉手术。大多数受访者(77.8%)表示,在约 10% 的经桡动脉手术中会出现桡动脉痉挛。只有 62% 的参与者在导管术后对桡动脉闭塞进行了评估。访谈数据揭示了指导临床决策的四个主题,即:(1)基于研究的决策;(2)利用临床经验;(3)受培训指导;以及(4)患者个体因素:本研究表明,尽管有临床指南,但澳大利亚和新西兰经桡动脉冠状动脉导管术的实践仍存在很大差异。临床实践中的差异以及影响临床决策的因素突出表明,未来需要制定战略来优化临床环境中的证据转化和实施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Heart, Lung and Circulation
Heart, Lung and Circulation CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.80%
发文量
912
审稿时长
11.9 weeks
期刊介绍: Heart, Lung and Circulation publishes articles integrating clinical and research activities in the fields of basic cardiovascular science, clinical cardiology and cardiac surgery, with a focus on emerging issues in cardiovascular disease. The journal promotes multidisciplinary dialogue between cardiologists, cardiothoracic surgeons, cardio-pulmonary physicians and cardiovascular scientists.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信