Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35605137›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists2022

Evaluation of the safety of a novel peripheral vasopressor pilot program and the impact on central line placement in medical and surgical intensive care units.

Kristen Marti, Christopher Hartley, Elizabeth Sweeney, John Mah, Nicholas Pugliese

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06920173 (The PULSE Study - The Peripheral Use of Low-dose Vasopressors for Safety and Efficacy in the Intensive Care Unit), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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.

NCT06920173 phase2recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

The PULSE Study - The Peripheral Use of Low-dose Vasopressors for Safety and Efficacy in the Intensive Care Unit: a Pilot Feasibility Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorKingston Health Sciences CentreRan2025 to 2026Enrolled50ConditionsShock, Peripheral Venous Catheterization, Central Venous Catheterization, Critically Ill Patients Admitted in ICUArmsExperiemental: Peripheral Venous Catheter
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Overview of Peripheral Vasopressor Use in an Academic Health System.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2025
    Article
  5. 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

5 authors.

Kristen MartiDepartment of Pharmacy Services, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT, USA.
Christopher HartleyDepartment of Pharmacy Services, Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME, USA.
Elizabeth SweeneyDepartment of Surgical Critical Care, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT, USA.
John MahDepartment of Pharmacy Services, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT, USA.
Nicholas PuglieseDepartment of Pharmacy Services, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT, and University of Connecticut School of Pharmacy, Storrs, CT, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this quality improvement project was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of peripheral vasopressor administration in an attempt to minimize the placement and improve early removal of unnecessary central lines to reduce central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI) rates.

methodsA retrospective chart review was conducted on patients who received vasopressors via peripheral infusion over 3 months, starting at the time of guideline implementation.

resultsWe identified 129 vasopressor orders among 79 patients that were administered peripherally. Among these orders, 3 events were documented as possible extravasation events. Forty-five patients (57%) did not require central line placement due to increasing vasopressor requirements. Standard utilization ratio data suggest minimal central line impact of the protocol implementation. December 2020 to February 2021 was associated with a large second peak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in our region. Utilization of central lines was less than predicted in December 2020 to February 2021 in 2 of our 3 intensive care units (ICUs); however, the differences were statistically significant on only 3 occasions. In the third ICU, utilization was greater than predicted, but this unit housed a majority of the most critically ill patients with COVID-19.

conclusionThis study suggests that short-term use of select vasopressors at conservative doses is safe for peripheral administration and points toward efficacy at preventing central line placement. Further analysis is required to confirm efficacy.

Indexed as

Catheterization, Central VenousCatheter-Related InfectionsCOVID-19Critical CareHumansIntensive Care UnitsPilot ProjectsRetrospective StudiesVasoconstrictor AgentsVasoconstrictor Agentscentral venous catheterperipheral vasopressorquality improvementvasoactive agentsvasopressor agents

Identifiers

PMID35605137
PMCPMC9384090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.