ArticleCureus2023
Difficult Intravenous Access Requiring Ultrasound in the Emergency Department: Associations With Delays in Care and Areas for Quality Improvement.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07779317 (Superior Venous Access), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 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.
Superior Venous Access: Single Lumen Midline Catheter vs Ultrasound Guided Peripheral IV as Performed by Bedside Emergency Department Registered Nurses, A Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Central venous versus short midline catheter in difficult intravenous access patients: a randomised clinical pilot trial.BMJ open · 2026Trial
- Recent Advances in Ultrasound-Guided Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Insertion.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2025Review
- Vein depth and diameter as predictive indicators of visibility and palpability during venipuncture in healthy volunteers.PloS one · 2025Article
- Health disparities influence peripheral venous access insertion time in the emergency department: An observational study.PloS one · 2025Observational
- Cost effectiveness of a vascular access education and training program for hospitalized emergency department patients.PloS one · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Patients with difficult intravenous access (DIVA) requiring ultrasound-guided intravenous (USGIV) access have been associated with delays in treatment, imaging, and disposition in academic emergency department (ED) patient populations. Our objective in this study was to characterize differences in time to intravenous access, imaging, and disposition between patients with DIVA versus those without DIVA requiring USGIV access in a community ED while also assessing for DIVA-associated comorbidities. Methods A cross-sectional, observational analysis was performed on admitted ED patients evaluated from September 2 to September 31, 2022, at a community ED. Patients with DIVA were defined as patients with two failed attempts at traditional intravenous placement. These patients require USGIV placement per institutional protocol. Patients younger than 18 years of age, trauma admissions, repeated visits from the same patient, patients with missing data, and direct hospital admissions were excluded. Continuous variables were recorded with medians and included ED throughput measures of time to vascular access, contrast CT imaging, and disposition. Differences in median times between DIVA patients versus non-DIVA patients were assessed with the Mann-Whitney U-test. Categorical data involving comorbidities were reported as percentages, and differences in proportions between DIVA versus non-DIVA patients were assessed via chi-square tests. Multivariate logistic regression analysis evaluated for correlations between DIVA and times to access, contrast CT imaging, disposition, and significant covariates while adjusting for demographic information. Results A total of 1250 patients were included in this investigation (5.8% associated with DIVA requiring USGIV access). The median age of all subjects was 69 (interquartile range = 58, 79) with no significant difference between the DIVA and non-DIVA groups. Patients with DIVA were more likely to be female in comparison to patients without DIVA (65.3% and 51.2%, respectively, p < 0.05). Patients with a history of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) (p < 0.001), intravenous drug use (IVDU) (p < 0.001), and venous thromboembolism (p < 0.05) had statistically significant associations with DIVA. On regression analysis, patients with DIVA were more likely to have a history of ESRD with an odds ratio (OR) of 3.56 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.62-7.81) and a history of IVDU with an OR of 14.29 (95% CI: 5.17-39.54). Patients with DIVA were associated with statistically significant greater median times to vascular access, contrast CT imaging, and disposition (p < 0.001 for time to access and disposition and p < 0.01 for time to contrast CT imaging). Conclusion In this study, DIVA cases requiring USGIV access were positively associated with significantly longer times to access, contrast CT imaging, and disposition compared to patients without DIVA at our community ED. Comorbidities such as IVDU and ESRD had statistically significant associations with DIVA requiring USGIV access.
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.