Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41385006›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical monitoring and computing2026

Program of quality improvement for extracorporeal blood purification therapies in the intensive care unit.

Matteo Cecchi, Diego Pomarè Montin, Antonio Fioccola, Vittorio Bocciero, Caterina Scirè Calabrisotto, Filomena Autieri, Manuela Benelli, Andrea Geppetti, Zaccaria Ricci, Stefano Romagnoli and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical monitoring and computing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Matteo CecchiDepartment of Health Sciences, Section of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Diego Pomarè MontinDepartment of Health Sciences, Section of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Antonio FioccolaDepartment of Health Sciences, Section of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Vittorio BoccieroDepartment of Health Sciences, Section of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Caterina Scirè CalabrisottoDepartment of Health Sciences, Section of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Filomena AutieriUnit of Accreditation, Quality and Risk Management, AOU Careggi, Florence, Italy.
Manuela BenelliUnit of Accreditation, Quality and Risk Management, AOU Careggi, Florence, Italy.
Andrea GeppettiDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Zaccaria RicciDepartment of Health Sciences, Section of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Stefano RomagnoliDepartment of Health Sciences, Section of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Gianluca VillaDepartment of Health Sciences, Section of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy. gianluca.villa@unifi.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Critically ill patients often require complex extracorporeal treatments, such as extracorporeal blood purification (EBP). At the bedside, there can be reluctance or uncertainty about when to initiate EBP, and there is no standard agreement on which goals to pursue, what prescriptions to use to achieve those goals, or which recommendations to follow to prevent complications. Furthermore, an accurate analysis of why clinical goals are not achieved or how often the patient should be reassessed to readjust the EBP prescription is not currently standardized. This narrative review describes the main actions characterizing a quality improvement program for EBP in the ICU, which took place at the University of Florence and was subsequently adopted at the national level. The pillars of this program were: (1) definition, implementation, and dissemination of information and communication technology tools aimed at objectively measuring results at the bedside, supporting dynamic prescribing and precision medicine, and promoting advances in knowledge in this field; (2) creation of a national multi-professional network of clinical users and researchers in EBP; (3) promotion and maintenance of technical and non-technical skills in EBP based on the reformulation of advanced academic training in this field.

Indexed as

Critical CareExtracorporeal CirculationHemofiltrationIntensive Care UnitsQuality ImprovementCritical IllnessExtracorporeal Membrane OxygenationHumansPrecision MedicineEducationHigh-fidelity simulationRegistryRiskSWOT analysis

Identifiers

PMID41385006
PMCPMC13194202

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.