Trial reportQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation2026
Performance of EQ5D-5L and AHPEQS for measuring outcomes and experiences of patients with peripherally inserted central catheters: a secondary analysis.
Trial report in Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePeripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC)-associated complications, such as infections and thrombosis, impact significantly upon patients’ experiences and outcomes of care. The purpose of this study was to assess the utility of a patient-reported outcome measure (EuroQol Five Dimension Five Level (EQ5D-5L)), and patient-reported experience measure (Australian Hospital Patient Experience Question Set (AHPEQS)), to discriminate incidence of PICC failure among adults.
methodsA secondary analysis was undertaken of two large randomised controlled trials, conducted in two adult tertiary hospitals in Queensland, Australia. The EQ5D-5L and AHPEQS instruments were assessed against incidence of three clinical outcomes likely to impact upon self-reported outcomes and experiences: Central Line Associated Bloodstream Infection (CLABSI), venous thrombosis, and all-cause PICC complication. Partial proportional odds, multinomial logistic, linear regression and generalised linear regression models were used to assess instrument performance.
resultsOverall, 984 participants provided baseline EQ5D-5L responses. Subsequently, n=628 completed an EQ5D-5L at study end; n=552 further completed the AHPEQS. EQ5D-5L demonstrated poor discrimination of individual complications (CLABSI, thrombosis), however, there was a significant association (p=<0.05) between all-cause PICC complication and: utility (− 0.1, Confidence Interval (CI) − 0.1 to − 0.1); disutility (0.4, CI 0.2–0.7); and self-reported health (– 4.3, CI − 7.8 to − 0.9). AHPEQS demonstrated poor discrimination; one item (‘both physical and emotional harm’) was significantly associated with all-cause PICC complication (1.0, 95%CI 0.1–1.9); CLABSI (2.4, 95%CI 0.7–4.2); and thrombosis (2.0, 95%CI 0.7–3.4).
conclusionEQ5D-5L demonstrated moderate suitability for use among patients with PICCs; AHPEQS demonstrated little reliability.
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.