ArticleNursing open2024
Vein Visualisation Technology for Peripheral Intravenous Access in Paediatric Patients: A Clinical Decision-Making Tool.
Article in Nursing open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe aim of this study is to develop a clinical decision-making tool to guide utilisation of vein visualisation technologies and enhance chances of successful peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) insertion, using data collected from a vascular access team in a large paediatric medical centre in the United States.
designQuantitative two-phase, cluster analysis design.
methodsThe study consisted of the following two phases: (1) a quantitative retrospective chart review to evaluate clinician utilisation and preference for vein visualisation technologies and (2) a quantitative prospective design, including a post-discharge retrospective chart review, to confirm utilisation of vein visualisation technologies and factors influencing clinician decision-making.
resultsA total of 16 groups were created based on the cluster analysis and expert clinician input. The results of first-attempt success analyses identified optimal device recommendations for each of the 16 patient groups. For patients older than 2 years old, the NIR device was more likely to result in first-attempt success regardless of BMI or access site and the NIR device was most optimal for almost all categories of paediatric patients regardless of BMI or access site. The transilluminator was found to be the most optimal device to use with younger patients (< 2 years old) who are underweight.
conclusionVein visualisation technology is recommended by professional nursing organisations to improve PIV access. Yet, adoption of this useful technology to aid selection of an optimal vein for insertion and visualisation during insertion is limited. This is the first study to develop a clinical decision-making tool for vein visualisation technology in PIVC insertion. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE: Vein visualisation technology allows for a rapid, thorough assessment of patients' vasculature to determine an optimal site for PIVC placement beyond what is visible to the naked eye or achievable using traditional methods. The tool was designed to guide healthcare professionals towards successful first attempt PIVC insertions, thereby improving patient outcomes and efficiency of care. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: None.
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.