Trial reportNursing open2026
Flushing Strategies for Totally Implantable Venous Access Devices in Nurse-Led Cancer Care: Exploratory Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in Nursing open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05707936 (Normal Saline Versus Heparin Intermittent Flushing for the Prevention of Occlusion in Port-a-Cath), 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.
Normal Saline Versus Heparin Intermittent Flushing for the Prevention of Occlusion in Port-a-Cath: 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
AIM (S): To examine catheter-related complications across different flushing strategies for totally implantable venous access devices when care is delivered through a standardized, nurse-led, protocol-driven framework.
designA single-center, prospective, exploratory, randomized, single-blind, three-arm parallel-group clinical trial.
resultsAmong 192 participants, catheter-related complications were rare across all groups. One occlusion occurred in the 10 mL saline group, no occlusions occurred in the 20 mL saline or heparin lock groups, minor bleeding occurred in three participants, and no catheter-related bloodstream infections or severe adverse events were reported. The very low number of events precluded meaningful comparative inference between flushing strategies.
conclusionWithin a standardized, nurse-led catheter care framework, complication rates were uniformly low regardless of flushing strategy. These exploratory findings do not establish equivalence or comparative effectiveness between flushing strategies. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: For oncology nursing practice, these findings support continued emphasis on standardized, protocol-driven catheter care, competency-based nurse training, and adherence monitoring; they do not establish that saline can replace heparin. IMPACT: This study addresses uncertainty about catheter outcomes under different flushing strategies in standardized nursing care. The main finding was uniformly low complication rates across groups. The findings may inform oncology nursing practice, catheter care standardization, and future trial design. REPORTING
methodThis study was reported in accordance with the CONSORT 2025 statement and relevant extensions. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients and members of the public were not involved in the design, conduct, analysis, interpretation, or preparation of this manuscript because the study evaluated a protocol-driven inpatient catheter care procedure delivered within routine oncology nursing practice.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05707936 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05707936).
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.