Key result
This paper presents a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of anticoagulation strategies for atrial fibrillation in critical care settings, and therefore contains no results.
Why the study?
Anticoagulation decision tools are not validated in critical care, and data assessing the impact of anticoagulation strategies on clinical outcomes in critically ill patients with AF are scarce.
Do anticoagulation strategies improve clinical outcomes in adults admitted to a general critical care setting with atrial fibrillation?
Population
Adults (>18 years) with AF admitted to a general critical care setting across published studies
Comparison
Anticoagulation strategies for AF
Design
Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors
Loading...
Highlights uncertainty in anticoagulation for AF in critical care; planned review will synthesize evidence to guide practice and trials.
Systematic Review
Do anticoagulation strategies improve clinical outcomes in adults admitted to a general critical care setting with atrial fibrillation?
This protocol outlines a planned systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of anticoagulation strategies for atrial fibrillation in critically ill patients.
Johnston et al. (2020) conducted a systematic review in Atrial fibrillation in critical care. Anticoagulation strategies vs. Placebo, standard care without anticoagulation, or other anticoagulants was evaluated on Percentage of patients started on anticoagulation for AF in a critical care setting. This paper presents a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of anticoagulation strategies for atrial fibrillation in critical care settings, and therefore contains no results.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: