Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

16 questions · 16 findings · 1 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 10 · 62.5%Very low 0 · 0%Low 6 · 37.5%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

NMES vs low‐dose heparin

Symptomatic DVT · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

NMES showed no clear difference in symptomatic DVT compared with low‐dose heparin (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.4 [0.02, 10.07]
1 study · 89 participants
Low

NMES vs Dextran 40

Symptomatic DVT · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

1 finding from 1 review

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 72 participants
GRADE not reported

NMES vs alternative prophylaxis

Symptomatic DVT · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

NMES showed no clear difference in symptomatic DVT compared with alternative prophylaxis (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.4 [0.02, 10.07]
1 study · 89 participants
Low

NMES vs GCS

Symptomatic DVT · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

1 finding from 1 review

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 36 participants
GRADE not reported

NMES vs IPCD

Symptomatic DVT · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

1 finding from 1 review

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 36 participants
GRADE not reported

NMES vs no prophylaxis

Symptomatic DVT · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

NMES showed no clear difference in symptomatic DVT compared with no prophylaxis (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.06 [0, 1.36]
1 study · 160 participants
Low

NMES vs low‐dose heparin

Asymptomatic DVT · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

NMES showed no clear difference in asymptomatic DVT compared with low‐dose heparin (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 1.61 [0.4, 6.43]
1 study · 89 participants
Low

NMES vs alternative prophylaxis

Asymptomatic DVT · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

NMES showed no clear difference in asymptomatic DVT compared with alternative prophylaxis (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 1.61 [0.4, 6.43]
1 study · 89 participants
Low

NMES vs Dextran 40

Asymptomatic DVT · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

1 finding from 1 review

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 72 participants
GRADE not reported

NMES vs GCS

Asymptomatic DVT · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

1 finding from 1 review

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 36 participants
GRADE not reported

NMES vs IPCD

Asymptomatic DVT · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

1 finding from 1 review

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 36 participants
GRADE not reported

NMES vs no prophylaxis

Asymptomatic DVT · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

NMES showed no clear difference in asymptomatic DVT compared with no prophylaxis (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.32 [0.06, 1.62]
1 study · 200 participants
Low

Combined NMES and low‐dose heparin vs no prophylaxis

Symptomatic DVT · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

1 finding from 1 review

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 32 participants
GRADE not reported

Combined NMES and low‐dose heparin vs low‐dose heparin

Symptomatic DVT · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

1 finding from 1 review

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 31 participants
GRADE not reported

Combined NMES and low‐dose heparin vs no prophylaxis

Asymptomatic DVT · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

1 finding from 1 review

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 32 participants
GRADE not reported

Combined NMES and low‐dose heparin vs low‐dose heparin

Asymptomatic DVT · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

1 finding from 1 review

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 31 participants
GRADE not reported