ArticleSurgery today2024
The safe implementation of peripherally inserted central catheters by nurse practitioners for patients with gastroenterological diseases in Japan: a single-center retrospective study.
Article in Surgery today, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of the integrated puncture method vs. the conventional puncture method in Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter placement for cancer patients.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Risk Factors for Difficulty and Complications Associated with Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Insertion.Interventional radiology (Higashimatsuyama-shi (Japan) · 2025Article
- Catheter removal after interstitial brachytherapy for breast cancer: Feasibility study for task delegation.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2024Article
- Task division by multiple console surgeons is beneficial for safe robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy implementation and education.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAs a safe and reliable alternative to central venous catheters (CVCs), peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are commonly used in clinical practice. However, the insertion of PICCs by nurse practitioners (NPs), especially in Japan, has not been reported extensively. Thus, we investigated the safety and efficiency of PICC insertions by NPs.
methodsThe participants were 1322 patients who underwent PICC insertion by NPs at Fujita Health University Hospital (FNPs). The basilic vein in the brachium was the preferred vein for insertion; the brachial vein was the alternative. Patients were monitored from the time of PICC insertion until its removal. Ultrasonography-guided puncture was used for all catheter insertions, and the catheter tip was replaced into the superior vena cava under fluoroscopic imaging with maximal sterile barrier precautions. The outcomes of the PICC insertions by the FNPs were evaluated retrospectively.
resultsOverall, 23 FNPs inserted a collective total of 1322 PICCs, which remained in place for a collective total of 23,619 catheter days. The rate of successful PICC insertion was 99% (1310 patients). The median time taken for PICC insertion was 12 min (interquartile range, 10-15 min). Intraoperative complications occurred in two patients (0.2%). The confirmed incidence of central line-associated bloodstream infection was 3.4% (45 patients), and these infections occurred on 1.9 per 1000 catheter days. The median duration of PICC placement was 15 days (range, 10-23 days).
conclusionPICC insertion by NPs is safe and a potential alternative to CVC insertion by surgeons.
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.