IPC plus pharmacological prophylaxis vs IPC alone: Major bleeding
IPC plus pharmacological prophylaxis probably leads to higher incidence of major bleedingd compared with IPC alone (moderate certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
IPC plus pharmacological prophylaxis vs IPC alone Incidence of major bleedingd · patients undergoing surgery or at risk of developing VTE because of other reasons (e.g. trauma) IPC plus pharmacological prophylaxis probably leads to higher incidence of major bleedingd compared with IPC alone (moderate certainty). Combined intermittent pneumatic leg compression and pharmacological prophylaxis for prevention of venous… (2016) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD005258.PUB3, superseded | OR 6.81 [1.99, 23.28] | 7 studies · 2155 participants | Moderate |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Combined intermittent pneumatic leg compression and pharmacological prophylaxis for prevention of venous thromboembolism 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.