Trial reportThe journal of vascular access2026
Long versus conventional peripheral intravenous catheters to reduce venipunctures during hospital stay: A randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in The journal of vascular access, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06290284 (Comparison Between the Long), which is not on this 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.
Comparison Between the Long (Mini-midline) and the Short Catheter (Peripheral Intravenous Catheter) in the Reduction of Venipunctures During Hospital Stay: a Randomized Controlled Trial
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSelecting the most appropriate vascular access is crucial to minimizing catheter-related complications and repeated-venipunctures. The objective of this study is to evaluate whether the use of a long peripheral catheter (LPC), compared to short peripheral catheter (SPC), results in a different number of patients requiring repeated venipunctures for blood withdrawal.
methodSingle-center, parallel arm interventional randomized controlled trial. Patients were randomized to receive either a conventional SPC or LPC, placed by trained Emergency Department nurses without ultrasound guidance. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients requiring additional venipunctures during hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included time to persistent withdrawal occlusion (PWO) and time to catheter failure. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06290284).
resultsIn total, 294 patients were randomly assigned to either the intervention or the control group. The catheter was successfully placed at the first attempt in 133/147 (90.5%) and 103/138 (74.6%) patients in the SPC and LPC arms, respectively. No significant difference was found between the two study arms in the proportion of patients requiring a venipuncture after SPC or LPC insertion: 85 out of 147 patients (57.8%) in the SPC group and 77 out of 138 patients (55.8%) in the LPC group (
conclusionAlthough LPCs did not significantly reduce the need for repeated venipunctures, they demonstrated more favorable performance in routine Emergency Department practice.
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.