Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29992507›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2019

Can variable practice habits and injection port dead-volume put patients at risk?

Michael T Kuntz, Roman Dudaryk, Richard R McNeer

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 43% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. End of year summary 2019: anaesthesia and airway management.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2020
    Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michael T KuntzDepartment of Anesthesiology, Jackson Memorial Hospital, University of Miami, 1611 NW 12th Ave, SW 303, Miami, FL, 33136, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0106-858X
Roman DudarykDepartment of Anesthesiology, Jackson Memorial Hospital, University of Miami, 1611 NW 12th Ave, SW 303, Miami, FL, 33136, USA.
Richard R McNeerDepartment of Anesthesiology, Jackson Memorial Hospital, University of Miami, 1611 NW 12th Ave, SW 303, Miami, FL, 33136, USA. McNeer@miami.edu.
University of Miami · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Injection ports used to administer medications and draw blood samples have inherent dead-volume. This volume can potentially lead to inadvertent drug administration, contribute to erroneous laboratory values by dilution of blood samples, and increase the risk of vascular air embolism. We sought to characterize provider practice in management of intravenous (IV) and arterial lines and measure dead-volumes of various injection ports. A survey was circulated to anesthesiology physicians and nurses to determine practice habits when administering medications and drawing blood samples. Dead-volume of one and four-way injection ports was determined by injecting methylene blue to simulate medication administration or blood sample aspiration and using absorption spectroscopy to measure sample concentration. Among the 65 survey respondents, most (64.52%) increase mainstream flow rate to flush medication given by a 1-way injection port. When using 4-way stopcocks, 56.45% flush through the same injection site. To obtain a sample from an arterial line, 67.74% draw back blood and collect the sample from the same 4-way stopcock; 32.26% use a different stopcock. Mean (SD) dead-volume in microliters ranged from 0.1 (0.0) to 5.6 (1.0) in 1-way injection ports and from 54.1 (2.8) to 126.5 (8.3) in 4-way injection ports. The practices of our providers when giving medications and drawing blood samples are variable. The dead-volume associated with injection ports used at our institution may be clinically significant, increasing errors in medication delivery and laboratory analysis.

Indexed as

Administration, IntravenousCatheters, IndwellingDrug Delivery SystemsInfusion PumpsPatient SafetyBlood Specimen CollectionCalibrationEmbolism, AirEquipment DesignHumansInfusions, IntravenousPressureSoftwareSpectrophotometryAdministration, intravenousBlood specimen collectionEmbolism, airMedication errorVascular access device

Identifiers

PMID29992507
OpenAlexW2873517269

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.