ArticleInternational journal of critical illness and injury science
Comparison of safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided supraclavicular and infraclavicular subclavian vein cannulation in intensive care unit patients: A randomized clinical study.
Article in International journal of critical illness and injury science. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the ease, difficulties, and complication rate of subclavian venous catheterization using the supraclavicular (SC) and infraclavicular (IC) approach under real-time ultrasound (USG) guidance in intensive care unit (ICU). The primary objective was to compare total procedure time during USG-guided subclavian vein catheterization. Methods: This was a prospective randomized comparative study. Eighty ICU patients of age >18 years of both genders requiring central venous catheterization were included in the study. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups using computer-generated random number table. USG guide central venous catheterization was done through SC approach in Group SC and through IC approach in Group IC after taking written consent. Results: The total procedure time was 304.5 ± 9.35 s in Group SC compared to 389.63 ± 18.04 s in Group IC ( Conclusion: USG-guided SC approach of subclavian vein catheterization has shorter procedural time with better needle visualization and less complication rates than the IC approach.
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.