Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

276 questions · 278 findings · 20 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 80 · 28.8%GRADE not reported 51 · 18.3%Very low 81 · 29.1%Low 56 · 20.1%Moderate 10 · 3.6%High 0 · 0%

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

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 low‐dose heparin

PE · 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 low‐dose heparin

Total VTE · 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 low‐dose heparin

Bleeding (major and minor) · 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

NMES vs GCS

Deep vein thrombosis · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

NMES showed no clear difference in total DVT compared with GCS (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.32 [0.01, 8.27]
1 study · 36 participants
Low

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 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 alternative prophylaxis

PE · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

NMES showed no clear difference in PE 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 1.31 [0.38, 4.48]
2 studies · 126 participants
Low

NMES vs GCS

PE · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

NMES showed no clear difference in PE compared with GCS (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the prevention of venous thromboembolism 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.32 [0.01, 8.27]
1 study · 36 participants
Low

NMES vs GCS

Total VTE · 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 GCS

Bleeding (major and minor) · 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

Deep vein thrombosis · 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
Low

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 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 IPCD

PE · 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
Low

NMES vs IPCD

Total VTE · 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

Bleeding (major and minor) · 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 alternative prophylaxis

Total VTE · participants at risk of venous thromboembolism

NMES showed no clear difference in total VTE 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 0.92 [0.34, 2.52]
1 study · 72 participants
Low

NMES vs alternative prophylaxis

Bleeding (major and minor) · 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
6 studies · 415 participants
GRADE not reported