Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38969373›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2024

Vascular access specialist teams versus standard practice for catheter insertion and prevention of failure: a systematic review.

Ismael Fernandez-Fernandez, Gaizka Parra-García, Ian Blanco-Mavillard, Peter Carr, Paulo Santos-Costa, Miguel Ángel Rodríguez-Calero

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors.

Ismael Fernandez-FernandezImplementation, Research, and Innovation Unit, Hospital Manacor, Manacor, Spain.
Gaizka Parra-GarcíaHospital Universitario Son Llàtzer, Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
Ian Blanco-MavillardHealthcare Implementation and Research Unit, Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga, Malaga, Spain ianblanco7@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-2851-5631
Peter CarrSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, National University of Ireland Galway, Galway, Ireland.
Paulo Santos-CostaThe Health Sciences Research Unit: Nursing (UICISA: E), Higher School of Nursing of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Miguel Ángel Rodríguez-CaleroQuality Department, Complejo Hospitalario Torrecárdenas, Almeria, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveBillions of vascular access devices (VADs) are inserted annually for intravenous therapy worldwide. However, their use is not without challenges. Facilitating the process and enhancing results, hospital authorities have created vascular access specialist teams (VASTs) with advanced competencies in the evaluation, insertion, care and management of VADs. The objective is to compare the effectiveness of VASTs versus standard practice regarding cannulation success and vascular access maintenance in hospitalised adults.

designSystematic review, using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. DATA SOURCES: We conducted a structured data search on Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus and EBSCOhost up to 31 May 2023. We did not impose a time limit regarding the date of publication. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies were eligible for inclusion in the review if they were randomised and non-randomised trials and observational studies. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: We included studies that described or evaluated the activity of VASTs compared with clinical practitioners. The outcomes analysed were the success of the cannulation and the incidence of associated adverse effects.

resultsThe search strategy produced 3053 papers published between 1984 and 2020, from which 12 were selected for analysis. VASTs are heterogeneously described among these studies, which mainly focus on insertions, frequently for patients with difficult intravenous access. Some patients presented with specific needs or requirement for specific insertion technique or catheter type. Compared with usual practice, these studies indicate that the involvement of a VAST is associated with a higher effectiveness in terms of first attempt insertions and insertion success rates, and a reduction in catheter-associated adverse events. However, meta-analyses confirming this trend are not currently possible.

conclusionsIt seems apparent that VASTS contribute to improving the health of patients during the administration of intravenous. VASTs seem to increase the effectiveness of VAD insertion and care and reduce complications. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021231259.

Indexed as

Vascular Access DevicesCatheterization, Central VenousCatheterization, PeripheralHumansPatient Care Teamadverse eventsclinical decision-makingsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38969373
PMCPMC11227807

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.