Trial reportJournal of medical ultrasonics (2001)2021
Ultrasound-guided internal jugular venipuncture using pocket-sized versus standard ultrasound devices: a prospective non-inferiority trial.
Trial report in Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Online Learning versus Hands-On Learning of Basic Ocular Ultrasound Skills: A Randomized Controlled Non-Inferiority Trial.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Trial
- The Use of a Handheld Ultrasound Device to Guide the Axillary Vein Access during Pacemaker and Cardioverter-Defibrillator Implantation. A Feasibility Study.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePocket-sized ultrasound devices (PUDs) are commonly adopted for bedside use despite their inferior performance compared with standard ultrasound devices (SUDs). We investigated the non-inferiority of PUDs versus SUDs for ultrasound-guided internal jugular venipuncture.
methodsAll patients undergoing scheduled surgery with general anesthesia and internal jugular vein catheter placement were prospectively included in this randomized non-inferiority trial to compare the qualities of the internal jugular venipuncture between the PUD group (Group P) and SUD group (Group S). The primary endpoint was puncture time, and the secondary endpoints included number of punctures, needle and guidewire visibility, and anatomic visibility.
resultsFifty-two patients were randomized to one of the two groups (26 per group). The mean (SEM) puncture time was 56.4 (10.9) s in Group P and 45.5 (4.0) s in Group S. The mean difference of 10.9 s was within the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 100% (two-sided 95% CI: - 12.9-34.6, upper limit of the 95% CI: 45.5) for puncture time. The mean (SEM) number of punctures was 1.15 (0.12) times in Group P and 1.12 (0.06) times in Group S. The difference of 0.04 punctures was within the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 100% (two-sided 95% CI: - 0.24-0.31, upper limit of the 95% CI: 1.12) for number of punctures. Non-inferiority was not shown for needle and guidewire visibility and anatomic visibility.
conclusionPUDs for internal jugular venipuncture are not inferior to SUDs with regard to puncture time and number of punctures, despite differences in visibility and device performance.
Indexed as
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.