Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33269024›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical biochemistry2020

The results of a close follow-up of trainees to gain a good blood collection practice.

Güzin Aykal, Hatice Esen, Ayşenur Yeğin, Cemile Öz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical biochemistry, 2020. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

4 authors.

Güzin AykalAntalya Education and Research Hospital, Clinical Biochemistry, Antalya, Turkey.
Hatice EsenAntalya Education and Research Hospital, Department of Research and Development, Antalya, Turkey.
Ayşenur YeğinAntalya Education and Research Hospital, Clinical Biochemistry, Antalya, Turkey.
Cemile ÖzAntalya Education and Research Hospital, Clinical Biochemistry, Antalya, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPhlebotomy is one of the most important steps in the preanalytical phase of a clinical laboratory process. In order to decrease phlebotomy errors, this specific procedure should be taught in detail by laboratory organizations. Our study aims to practice the training program on venous blood sampling and observe the close follow-up results.

methodsIn this observational study, 127 students who started their summer internship in Antalya Education and Research Hospital were given a one-day theoretical phlebotomy training in accordance with the Venous Blood Sampling Guidelines. After the theoretical training, phlebotomy applications of 10 students who were working in the field of out-patient blood sampling were observed both with and without their knowledge. A comprehensive checklist related to phlebotomy was created by the trainers in Antalya Education and Research Hospital and the observers answered each question as yes or no. For the statistical analysis, IBM SPSS Statistics 21.0 was used.

resultsAfter the theoretical education, the trainees were observed but no significant difference was found between the first and the second informed observations (p = 0.125). The students were observed three times more in the following week without their knowledge. There was a statistically significant difference between the first and the third unannounced observations (p=0.001).

conclusionsIn order to perform phlebotomy correctly, apart from theoretical education, a close follow-up is necessary too.

Indexed as

close follow-uppatient safetyphlebotomypreanalytical phasevenipuncture education

Identifiers

PMID33269024
PMCPMC7682809

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.