ArticleCureus2021
Development of a Three-Dimensionally Printed Ultrasound-Guided Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Phantom.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Role of 3D Printing in Planning Complex Medical Procedures and Training of Medical Professionals-Cross-Sectional Multispecialty Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
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
Introduction Ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous catheter (US-PIVC) placement is an effective technique to establish PIV access when the traditional approach fails. Many training programs utilize commercial or homemade phantoms for procedural training. However, commercial products tend to be expensive and lack realism, while homemade blocks tend to be single-use and degrade easily. Thanks to the increasing availability of three-dimensional (3D) printers in academic settings, we sought to design and develop a reusable 3D-printed US-PIVC phantom and to evaluate its utility in terms of time needed to achieve IV placement and perceived realism compared to a commercial model among a group of emergency medicine (EM) physicians. Methods The upper extremity vascular phantom was constructed using 3D printing and casting techniques. A convenience sampling of EM physicians was timed by placing a US-PIVC in the 3D-printed and commercial models. Participants were also surveyed to assess their impression of the realism of the models. The primary outcome was the time required for US-PIVC placement in the 3D-printed model compared to the commercial model. Secondary outcomes were the assessment of differences in perceived realism and total cost between the two models. Results Twenty-one EM physicians completed the study. There were no significant differences in the mean time (seconds) for US-PIVC placement in the 3D-printed model (31, SD: 21) compared to the commercial model (30, SD: 18), p=0.77. Mean realism score trended higher for the 3D-printed model (3.6, SD: 0.9) compared to the commercial model (3.1, SD: 1.0), p=0.10. The total cost for the 3D-printed model was $120, with the interchangeable replacement part costing $21, which was much cheaper compared to the commercial phantom, which cost $549. Conclusion We developed a 3D-printed reusable US-PIVC phantom, and it proved to be more economical without sacrificing the realism and time required for US-PIVC placement when compared to a commercial phantom.
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.