Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38630346›Full record

Observational studyInternal and emergency medicine2024

Evaluation of use and identification of predictive factors for nonuse of peripheral venous catheters in the emergency department.

Florent Noel, Aurélie Lefèvre, Jacques-Emmanuel Galimard, Célina Pognonec, Christian Kassasseya, Sofiane Yefsah, Youri Yordanov, Pierre-Clément Thiebaud

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Internal and emergency medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

8 authors.

Florent NoelService d'Accueil Des Urgences, Hôpital Saint Antoine, AP-HP.Sorbonne Université, 184, Rue du Faubourg Saint-Antoine, 75012, Paris, France.
Aurélie LefèvreService d'Accueil Des Urgences, Hôpital Saint Antoine, AP-HP.Sorbonne Université, 184, Rue du Faubourg Saint-Antoine, 75012, Paris, France.
Jacques-Emmanuel GalimardStatistical Unit, EBMT, Paris, France.
Célina PognonecService d'Accueil Des Urgences, Hôpital Cochin, AP-HP.Université de Paris Cité, Paris, France.
Christian KassasseyaService d'Accueil Des Urgences, Hôpital Henri Mondor, AP-HP.Hôpitaux Universitaires Henri Mondor, Créteil, France.
Sofiane YefsahService d'Accueil Des Urgences, Hôpital Tenon, AP-HP.Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Youri YordanovService d'Accueil Des Urgences, Hôpital Saint Antoine, AP-HP.Sorbonne Université, 184, Rue du Faubourg Saint-Antoine, 75012, Paris, France.
Pierre-Clément ThiebaudService d'Accueil Des Urgences, Hôpital Saint Antoine, AP-HP.Sorbonne Université, 184, Rue du Faubourg Saint-Antoine, 75012, Paris, France. pierre-clement.thiebaud@aphp.fr.ORCID 0000-0001-9519-1783

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The placement of peripheral venous catheters (PVC) is a frequent procedure in the emergency department (ED), which exposes patients to complications (hematoma, fluid leakage, phlebitis, edema, infection), increases hemolysis of blood samples, is time-consuming and costly. The main aim of this study is to analyze the rate of PVC nonuse in the ED and to identify predictive factors of their nonuse. This prospective single-center observational study was conducted in the ED of the Saint-Antoine Hospital in Paris, France between February and March 2022. Adult patients receiving a PVC were included. In addition to demographic and medical data, the reason for PVC prescription and the prescribing physician's expectation of PVC use were collected. A total of 304 patients were included, with a median age of 61.5 years (IQR: 43-79 years), of whom 152 (50%) were men. PVC were primarily prescribed for intravenous medication administration. Seventy-two (23.7%) PVC were not used. In multivariable analysis, the predictive factors of nonuse were the prescribing physician's expectation of nonuse [OR 6.35, CI 95% (2.64-15.29), for "no" and "not sure" vs. "yes" responses] and the reason for prescribing "just in case" [OR 3.54, CI 95% (1.37-9.17)]. PVC were not used in 23.7% of cases. Predictors of nonuse were the prescribing physician's expectation of nonuse and the reason for prescribing "just in case". A PVC should probably not be prescribed if the prescribing physician thinks it will not be used or prescribes it "just in case".

Indexed as

Catheterization, PeripheralEmergency Service, HospitalAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedParisProspective StudiesEmergency departmentOrganizationPeripheral venous catheterizationRelevanceUse

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.