ArticleBMJ quality improvement reports2016
Eliminating guidewire retention during ultrasound guided central venous catheter insertion via an educational program, a modified CVC set, and a drape with reminder stickers.
Article in BMJ quality improvement reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Silent Retention: Endovascular Retrieval of a Guidewire Undetected for Three Months in an ESRD Patient: A Case Report.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Retained Guidewire Following Bedside Femoral Venous Catheterization: A Case Report.Case reports in surgery · 2026Article
- Guide wire misadventure: a duo of inadvertent intravascular migration.Journal of surgical case reports · 2025Article
- Failure mode and effects analysis applied to central venous catheter placement.BMJ open quality · 2025Review
- Percutaneous extraction of retained guidewire from a 22-year-old woman 5 years after atrial tachycardia ablation: A novel application of the hangman loop snare technique.HeartRhythm case reports · 2024Article
- Reducing central vein catheterization complications with a focused educational program: a retrospective cohort study.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Yet another lost guide wire.Saudi journal of anaesthesiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Guidewire retention is a severe but preventable complication from central venous catheter (CVC) insertion. There were three cases of guidewire retention during CVC insertion in the medical intensive care unit (MICU) in Singapore General Hospital, in the period between December 2011 and February 2012. The primary objective of this quality improvement project was to eliminate future incidences of guidewire retention during CVC insertion in the MICU and medical intermediate care area (MICA) via a structured educational program and a cost effective modified CVC set. The secondary objective was to perform a cost analysis and comparison between the use of the conventional hospital CVC set and drape with our newly modified CVC dressing kit. Root cause analysis of the three cases identified major factors leading to guidewire retention. Interventions were planned and tested using PDSA cycles. Internal medicine trainees rotating through MICU and MICA during the period between February 2012 and June 2013 underwent a multi-modal structured CVC insertion training program with hands on simulation. They also used a newly modified CVC dressing kit and drape. The CVC dressing kit was modified (CVC PLUS) to include a sterile drape with reminder stickers stating "REMOVE the GUIDEWIRE," as well as a sterile ultrasound sleeve. The total number of CVC insertions performed and guidewire retentions were monitored. During the period of study there were 320 CVC insertions in the MICU and MICA. Since this quality improvement project was initiated, and up to the submission of this article, there have not been any further cases of guidewire retention in the MICU and MICA. The total cost reduction per use of CVC PLUS was S$29.26 (Singaporean Dollars). A multi-modal structured training program, integrated with a modified, pre-packed CVC set, and drapes with reminder stickers (all included in CVC PLUS) were cost effective, and improved patient safety by eliminating guidewire retention during CVC insertion.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.