Trial reportJournal of paediatrics and child health2026
Biosensor Compared With Standard Care to Identify Extravasation Injuries in Paediatric Intensive Care: A Randomised Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Journal of paediatrics and child health, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimTo evaluate whether, in children treated in paediatric intensive care units (PICU) with peripheral venous access devices (PVADs) receiving intermediate- or high-risk peripheral intravenous medications, the use of a tissue-infiltration biosensor (ivWatch), compared to standard care, reduces extravasation injuries.
methodsA superiority, parallel group randomised controlled trial conducted in a single Queensland quaternary hospital PICU from September 2020 to July 2022. Children with PVADs inserted in the distal half of the limb and receiving intermediate- to high-risk infusates for ≥ 24 h were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to biosensor (ivWatch monitor applied within 10-15 mm of the PVAD tip) plus standard clinical observation, or standard observation alone. Primary outcome was extravasation severity on the 4-point Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Centre Extravasation Harm Scale. Injuries were compared between treatment groups using ordinal logistic regression.
resultsA total of 175 children were enrolled, 88 to biosensor and 87 to standard care. Extravasation severity was similar between groups, with no, mild and moderate injury occurring in 56 (69%), 25 (30%) and 2 (2%) participants in the biosensor group and 61 (70%), 24 (28%) and 2 (2%) in the standard care group (proportional odds ratio = 1.13; 95% CI: 0.59, 2.15, p = 0.71). No statistically significant between-group differences in extravasation severity, volume, treatment sequelae, PVADs used or dwell time were observed. The biosensor was acceptable to nurses.
conclusionsIn this PICU population, biosensor monitoring in addition to standard care did not significantly reduce extravasation injuries. The technology was acceptable to bedside nursing staff.
trial registrationACTRN12620000317998.
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.