ArticleBMJ open2026
Analysis of risk factors for primary non-central malposition of peripherally inserted central catheter tip in neonates with different diseases admitted to neonatal surgical department: a case-control study.
Article in BMJ open, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the risk factors for primary non-central malposition of peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) tip in neonates admitted to the neonatal surgical department, compare the malposition rates across different insertion sites in disease types, and explore whether different diseases affect PICC tip malposition.
designA retrospective case-control study conducted in accordance with the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement.
settingA 3A women's and children's hospital in South China (Guangdong Province).
participantsA total of 558 neonates aged ≤28 days who underwent PICC insertion between January 2019 and November 2024 were enrolled. Neonates with congenital circulatory system malformations, incomplete clinical data and death or treatment withdrawal before tip positioning were excluded. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the incidence of primary non-central PICC tip malposition confirmed by X-ray or ultrasound within 24 h after insertion. Secondary outcomes included comparison of primary non-central PICC tip malposition rates across different insertion sites and comparison of primary PICC tip malposition rates by insertion sites across different disease groups.
results558 neonates were included in this study, including 460 cases with PICC tip in place and 98 with PICC tip malposition. In binary logistic regression analysis, the PICC insertion site was considered an independent risk factor (OR 2.908, 95% CI 1.748, 4.840, p<0.001) for PICC tip malposition. Statistically significant differences were observed in the PICC tip malposition rates between the head and neck vein insertion and the limb vein insertion in neonates from different disease groups (p<0.0167).
conclusionMedical staff can choose appropriate upper or lower limb veins for PICC insertion without worrying about the impact of abdominal diseases or thoracic diseases on non-central PICC tip malposition. PICC insertion via the head and neck veins should be performed with caution in neonates, as these sites carry a high risk of primary non-central tip malposition compared with other insertion sites.
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.