Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30886119›Full record

ArticleBMJ quality & safety2019

Variation in use and outcomes related to midline catheters: results from a multicentre pilot study.

Vineet Chopra, Scott Kaatz, Lakshmi Swaminathan, Tanya Boldenow, Ashley Snyder, Rachel Burris, Steve J Bernstein, Scott Flanders

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ quality & safety, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
12.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT04601597 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2020, after this paper: background citation

Midline Catheter Tip Position and Catheter-Related Complications in Antimicrobial Therapy- A Multi-centre Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorSir Run Run Shaw HospitalRan2020 to 2021Enrolled330ConditionsInfectionArmsShu Bei Kang (China) Midline Catheters
NCT06884176 nawithdrawnnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Complication Rates Associated With Central Venous Catheters Versus Midline Catheters: A Randomized Control Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorAlbert Einstein College of MedicineRan2026 to 2027Enrolled0ConditionsCentral Venous Catheter, Midline Catheter, Complication of CatheterArmsUltrasound Guided Central Venous Catheter, Ultrasound Guided Midline Catheter
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 83 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Vineet ChopraThe Division of Hospital Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA vineetc@umich.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-8670-9376
Scott KaatzDepartment of Internal Medicine, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan, USA.
Lakshmi SwaminathanDepartment of Internal Medicine, Beaumont Hospital, Dearborn, Michigan, USA.
Tanya BoldenowSt. Josephs Health Center, Ypsilanti, Michigan, USA.
Ashley SnyderThe Division of Hospital Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Rachel BurrisThe Division of Hospital Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Steve J BernsteinPatient Safety Enhancement Program and Center for Clinical Management Research, VA Ann Arbor Health Care System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Scott FlandersThe Division of Hospital Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
University of Michigan · USBeaumont Hospital, Royal Oak · USHenry Ford Health System · US

Funding

Implementing MAGIC to Improve PICC Appropriateness and Patient OutcomesR18HS025891 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI CHOPRA, VINEET · 2018 to 2021
$1.6M
AHRQ HHS R18 HS025891
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile midline vascular catheters are gaining popularity in clinical practice, patterns of use and outcomes related to these devices are not well known.

methodsTrained abstractors collected data from medical records of hospitalised patients who received midline catheters in 12 hospitals. Device characteristics, patterns of use and outcomes were assessed at device removal or at 30 days. Rates of major (upper-extremity deep vein thrombosis [DVT], bloodstream infection [BSI] and catheter occlusion) and minor complications were assessed. χ

resultsComplete data on 1161 midlines representing 5%-72% of all midlines placed in participating hospitals between 1 January 2017 and 1 March 2018 were available. Most (70.8%) midlines were placed in general ward settings for difficult intravenous access (61.4%). The median dwell time of midlines across hospitals was 6 days; almost half (49%) were removed within 5 days of insertion. A major or minor complication occurred in 10.3% of midlines, with minor complications such as dislodgement, leaking and infiltration accounting for 71% of all adverse events. While rates of major complications including occlusion, upper-extremity DVT and BSI were low (2.2%, 1.4% and 0.3%, respectively), they were just as likely to lead to midline removal as minor complications (53.8% vs 52.5%, p=0.90). Across hospitals, absolute volume of midlines placed varied from 100 to 1837 devices, with corresponding utilisation rates of 0.97%-12.92% (p<0.001).

conclusionMidline use and outcomes vary widely across hospitals. Although rates of major complications are low, device removal as a result of adverse events is common.

Indexed as

Outcome Assessment, Health CarePractice Patterns, Physicians'Catheterization, Central VenousCatheter-Related InfectionsHumansInpatientsMichiganPilot ProjectsProspective StudiesAppropriatenesscontinuous quality improvementdecision makinghealthcare quality improvementMidline Catheterpatient safetyVascular Access

Identifiers

PMID30886119
PMCPMC6860966
OpenAlexW2922303843

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.