ArticleCureus2024
Ultrasound-Guided Peripheral Intravenous Access Training: A Prospective Observational Study of Emergency Nurses.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Review
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 Ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous (USGPIV) placement is more successful, comfortable, and longer lasting than traditional landmark-based IVs. While many hospitals have protocols for becoming credentialed in this skill, there is little information available about the USGPIV success rate during and after training. Objectives This pilot study aimed to quantify USGPIV attempts by emergency nurses undergoing USGPIV training and to determine if 10 successful USGPIVs predicted success in the next USGPIV. The secondary aims were to determine failure points for unsuccessful USGPIVs and the time to complete training. Methods Sixteen emergency nurses with no prior USGPIV experience were enrolled. Participants completed a one-hour didactic session and one hour of hands-on training with vein simulators. Participants had direct observation of all USGPIV attempts up until 10 successful cannulations. Each attempt was recorded along with reasons for USGPIV attempt failure and the time required to become credentialed. Results Participants attempted 200 USGPIVs with a success rate of 80% (160/200). Fourteen participants completed 10 successful USGPIVs, requiring a median of 11 attempts (IQR 10-13) and a success rate of 92.9% (13/14) on subsequent USGPIV attempts. Participants required a median observation time of 4.13 hours (IQR: 3.94-4.75). The most common point of failure was using dynamic ultrasound guidance to maintain needle tip visualization. Conclusions USGPIVs are a valuable skill that requires time and practice. Emergency nurses with no prior USGPIV experience can achieve the requirements for hospital credentialing and success on subsequent USGPIV insertion by completing 10 successful USGPIVs after a two-hour training session and four hours of direct observation.
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.