Trial reportRevista brasileira de enfermagem2024
Effectiveness of the modified Seldinger technique for peripheral central catheter in newborns: a randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Revista brasileira de enfermagem, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesto evaluate the effectiveness of peripheral central catheterization by comparing the modified Seldinger technique and the conventional technique in critically ill newborns.
methodsrandomized unmasked clinical trial conducted in a public children's hospital. Participation of 111 newborns with randomized allocation, 56 in the control group (conventional technique) and 55 in the experimental group (modified Seldinger). Success and absence of complications were evaluated as primary outcomes. The pain scale, difficulty in hemostasis, procedure time and number of punctures were considered secondary outcomes.
resultsthere was no statistical significance between groups, either for success (p=0.705) or absence of complications (p=0.347). A lower pain score, improved hemostasis, increased assertiveness with fewer punctures and reduced procedure time were not observed in the experimental group.
conclusionsthe modified Seldinger technique did not prove to be a more effective insertion technology compared to the conventional method. Brazilian Clinical Trial Registry: RBR-69vks36.
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.