What do systematic reviews say?

Intravenous vs intraosseous route

Intravenous may leads to higher insertion failures compared with intraosseous route (low certainty).

• Comparison of routes for achieving parenteral access with a focus on the management of patients with Ebola virus disease 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 3.89 [2.39, 6.33]
  2 studies · 242 participants
  Low

Intravenous vs subcutaneous route

• Comparison of routes for achieving parenteral access with a focus on the management of patients with Ebola virus disease 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  4 studies · 4 participants
  Low

Intravenous vs intraosseous route

• Comparison of routes for achieving parenteral access with a focus on the management of patients with Ebola virus disease 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  4 studies · 342 participants
  Moderate

Intravenous vs intraosseous route

Intravenous showed no clear difference in dislodgement of device during infusion compared with intraosseous route (low certainty).

• Comparison of routes for achieving parenteral access with a focus on the management of patients with Ebola virus disease 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.53 [0.18, 1.55]
  1 study · 182 participants
  Low

Intravenous vs intraosseous route

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Comparison of routes for achieving parenteral access with a focus on the management of patients with Ebola virus disease 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intravenous vs intraosseous route

• Comparison of routes for achieving parenteral access with a focus on the management of patients with Ebola virus disease 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 182 participants
  Moderate

Intravenous vs subcutaneous route

Intravenous probably leads to higher insertion failures compared with subcutaneous route (moderate certainty).

• Comparison of routes for achieving parenteral access with a focus on the management of patients with Ebola virus disease 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 14.79 [2.87, 76.08]
  3 studies · 238 participants
  Moderate

Intravenous vs subcutaneous route

• Comparison of routes for achieving parenteral access with a focus on the management of patients with Ebola virus disease 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 96 participants
  Low

Intravenous vs subcutaneous route

Intravenous may leads to higher dislodgement of device compared with subcutaneous route (low certainty).

• Comparison of routes for achieving parenteral access with a focus on the management of patients with Ebola virus disease 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 3.78 [1.16, 12.34]
  1 study · 67 participants
  Low

Intravenous vs subcutaneous route

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Comparison of routes for achieving parenteral access with a focus on the management of patients with Ebola virus disease 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intravenous iron vs placebo

• Intravenous iron therapy for non‐anaemic, iron‐deficient adults 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  8 studies · 548 participants
  Low

Intravenous iron vs placebo

• Intravenous iron therapy for non‐anaemic, iron‐deficient adults 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  3 studies · 344 participants
  Very low

Intravenous iron vs placebo

• Intravenous iron therapy for non‐anaemic, iron‐deficient adults 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  7 studies · 376 participants
  Very low

Intravenous iron vs placebo

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Intravenous iron therapy for non‐anaemic, iron‐deficient adults 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intravenous iron vs placebo

• Intravenous iron therapy for non‐anaemic, iron‐deficient adults 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 32 participants
  Very low

Intravenous iron vs placebo

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Intravenous iron therapy for non‐anaemic, iron‐deficient adults 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intravenous iron vs placebo

It is very uncertain whether intravenous iron changes mild adverse effects compared with placebo (very low certainty).

• Intravenous iron therapy for non‐anaemic, iron‐deficient adults 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.19 [0.97, 1.45]
  3 studies · 440 participants
  Very low

Intravenous iron vs oral iron

Intravenous iron therapy may leads to higher ferritin preoperatively postintervention (ng/L) compared with oral iron therapy (low certainty).

• Iron therapy for preoperative anaemia 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  MD 395.03 [227.72, 562.35]
  2 studies · 151 participants
  Low

Intravenous iron vs oral iron

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Iron therapy for preoperative anaemia 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intravenous iron vs oral iron

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Iron therapy for preoperative anaemia 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found