Comparing Pain, Comfort, Satisfaction and Complications in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease Post Coronary Artery Angiography and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention by Anatomical Snuffbox and Transradial Access
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The purposes of this research were to compare pain, comfort, satisfaction and complications in patients with coronary artery disease post coronary artery angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention by anatomical snuffbox and transradial access. A total of 60 patients who had post coronary artery angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention at Cardiac Catheterization Lab, Somdejpranangchaosirikit hospital were selected using purposive sampling. The sample were divided into 2 groups: 30 anatomical snuffbox patients and 30 transradial access patients. Data were collected using three questionnaires 1) Demographic data form 2) Pain, comfort and satisfaction questionnaires with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of 1, 0.97 and 0.93, respectively, and 3) Complication data form. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, independent samples t-test and Chi-square test. The findings were presented as follows:
1. The patients with coronary artery disease post coronary artery angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention by anatomical snuffbox had mild pain (Mean = 0.77, SD = 0.94), high level of comfort (Mean = 37.40, SD = 2.79), high level of satisfaction (Mean = 24.53, SD = 1.55) and 1 participant had a hematoma complication.
2. The patients with coronary artery disease post coronary artery angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention by transradial access had mild pain (Mean = 2.53, SD = 1.61), moderate level of comfort (Mean = 25.50, SD = 7.66), high level of satisfaction (Mean = 21.87, SD = 2.53) and complications occurred including hematoma in 2 participants and 1 had arm movement disability.
3. The patients with coronary artery disease post coronary artery angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention by anatomical snuffbox had less pain while comfort and satisfaction level were higher than transradial access patients. Pain, comfort and satisfaction were statistically significant at the level of .05 (t = -5.189, 7.996, and 4.926, respectively). Complications including hematoma and arm movement disability were not statistically significant at the level of .05.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Virani SS, Alonso A, Aparicio HJ, Benjamin EJ, Bittencourt MS, Callaway CW, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2021 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2021;143(8):e254-e743.
ICT MOPH. Mortality rate cardiovascular disease 2020. Nonthaburi: Office of the Permanent Secretary of MOPH; 2020.
The Heart Association of Thailand under the Royal Patronage of H.M. The King. Thai acute coronary syndromes guidelines 2020. Bankok: Nextstep D-sign; 2020.
Balaji NR, Shah PB. Cardiology patient page. Radial artery catheterization. Circulation. 2011;124(16):e407-8.
Sesang A. Transradial catheterization. Siriraj Medical Bulletin 2017;10(2):90-6. (in Thai).
Gomes BR. Care of the patient undergoing radial approach heart catheterization: implications for medical-surgical nurses. Medsurg Nurs 2015;24(3):173-6.
Thach N, Colombo A, Dayi H, Cindy L, Shin g. Practical handbook of advanced interventional cardiology. 4th ed. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2013. p. 118-36
Babunashvili A, Dundua D. Recanalization and reuse of early occluded radial artery within 6 days after previous transradial diagnostic procedure. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2011;77(4):530-6.
Ferdinand K. Left distal transradial access in the anatomical snuffbox for coronary angiography (ldTRA) and interventions (ldTRI). EuroIntervention 2017;13(7):851-7.
Cerda A, Sol M. Anatomical snuffbox and it clinical significance: a literature review. Int J Morphol 2015;33(4):1355-60.
Deora S, Agrawal D, Choudhary R, Kaushik A, Patel TM. Anatomical snuff box approach for percutaneous coronary interventions - current status. Indian Heart J 2021;73(5):539-43.
Yu W, Hu P, Wang S, Yao L, Wang H, Dou L, et al. Distal radial artery access in the anatomical snuffbox for coronary angiography and intervention: a single center experience. Medicine 2020;99(3):e18330.
Gajurel RM, Sahi R, Shrestha H, Thapa S, Khanal R. Initial experience on anatomical snuff box approach for coronary angiogram & percutaneous coronary intervention in a tertiary care center Nepal. World Journal of Cardiovascular Diseases 2018;08:578-87.
Li F, Shi GW, Yu XL, Song RX, Xiao JQ, Huang HM, et al. Safety and efficacy of coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention via distal transradial artery access in the anatomical snuffbox: a single-centre prospective cohort study using a propensity score method. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2022;22(1):74.
Roghani-Dehkordi F, Riazi A, Shafie D, Khosravi A, Sadeghi M, Vakhshoori M, et al. Trans-snuff box approach as a new access site for coronary angiography and angioplasty versus trans-radial approach in terms of feasibility, safety, and complications. ARYA Atheroscler 2020;16(6):263-8.
Kim Y, Ahn Y, Kim I, Lee DH, Kim MC, Sim DS, et al. Feasibility of coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention via left snuffbox approach. Korean Circ J 2018;48(12):1120-30.
Koutouzis M, Kontopodis E, Tassopoulos A, Tsiafoutis I, Katsanou K, Rigatou A, et al. Distal versus traditional radial approach for coronary angiography. Cardiovasc Revasc Med 2019;20(8):678-80.
Aphijirawat W. TCTAP A-087 Effect of pre-procedural transdermal nitroglycerin patch on diameter of distal radial artery in anatomical snuffbox. JACC 2022;79(15 Suppl):S53-S56.
Munjit W, Polsook R. Symptom experience and symptom management of post percutaneous coronary intervention among patients with coronary artery disease. Royal Thai Navy Medical Journal 2022;2(49):398-416. (in Thai).
Boonrueang P, Uakit N. Selected factors associated with sexual function among patients with myocardial infarction after percutaneous transluminal coronary intervention. Royal Thai Navy Medical Journal 2020;47(1):140-57. (in Thai).
Mountcastle VB. Medical physiology. 2nd ed. St.Louis: Mosby; 1980.
Burns N, Grove SK. The practice of nursing research: appraisal, synthesis and generation of evidence. 6th ed. Maryland Heights, Missouri: Saunders Elsevier; 2009.
Thato R. Nursing research: concepts to application. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University Printing House; 2018. (in Thai).
Hartrick CT, Kovan JP, Shapiro S. The numeric rating scale for clinical pain measurement: a ratio measure? Pain Pract 2003;3(4):310-6.
Kolcaba K. Comfort theory and practice: a vision for holistic health care and research. New York: Springer Publishing Company; 2003.
Chuayruang K. Development and testing of the patient-reported outcomes instrument for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus for Thai people at the diabetes clinic, out-patient department, King Chulalongkorn memorial hospital. [Doctoral Dissertation, Faculty of Medicine]. Chulalongkorn University; 2011. (in Thai).
Sesang A. Nursing for patients with coronary artery disease post coronary artery angiography. Siriraj Medical Bulletin 2016;9(3):168-74. (in Thai).
Nantasukhon A, Ausawakijpanich S, Siripittayakunkit A. A study of the patients’ vascular complications and pain after cardiac catheterization between transfemoral artery and transradial artery approach at post catheterization care unit, Ramathibodi hospital. Mahidol R2R e-Journal 2019;6(2):42-54. (in Thai).