ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2023
Avoiding incompatible drug pairs in central-venous catheters of patients receiving critical care: an algorithm-based analysis and a staff survey.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Compatibility and Stability Study of Butorphanol, Nicardipine, Urapidil, and Tirofiban During Multidrug Simultaneous Infusion.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Article
- Comparative evaluation of amiodarone and furosemide compatibility under different mixing conditions.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Smart Formulation: AI-Driven Web Platform for Optimization and Stability Prediction of Compounded Pharmaceuticals Using KNIME.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn a critical care setting, we aimed to identify and solve physico-chemical drug incompatibilities in central-venous catheters considering the staffs' knowledge and assumptions about incompatibilities.
methods(i) After positive ethical vote, an algorithm to identify incompatibilities was developed and applied. The algorithm was based on KIK
results(i) At least one incompatibility was identified in 64 (61.4%) of 104 enrolled patients. Eighty one (62.3%) of 130 incompatible combinations affected piperacillin/tazobactam and in 18 (13.8%) each furosemide and pantoprazole. (ii) 37.8% (n = 14) of the staff members participated in the questionnaire survey (median age: 31, IQR: 4.75 years). The combination of piperacillin/tazobactam and pantoprazole was incorrectly judged to be compatible by 85.7%. Only rarely felt the majority of respondents unsafe in administering drugs (median score: 1; 0, never to 5, always). (iii) In those 64 patients with at least one incompatibility, 68 avoidance recommendations were given, and all were fully accepted. In 44 (64.7%) of 68 recommendations "Step 1: Administer sequentially" was suggested as a avoidance strategy. In 9/68 (13.2%) "Step 2: Use another lumen", in 7/68 (10.3%) "Step 3: Take a break", and in 8/68 (11.8%) "Step 4: Use catheters with more lumens" were recommended.
conclusionsAlthough incompatibilities were common, the staff rarely felt unsafe when administering drugs. Knowledge deficits correlated well with the incompatibilities identified. All recommendations were fully accepted.
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.