Replacement of administration sets (including transducers) for peripheral arterial catheters 4 days versus 7 days: a systematic review.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: This article presents a systematic review of the evidence for the optimal interval for replacement of administration sets for peripheral arterial catheters. BACKGROUND: Peripheral arterial catheters are attached to administration sets, including transducers, which are changed routinely in some hospitals on the understanding that prolonged duration of administration sets use may cause a higher incidence of infection. DESIGN: Systematic review. METHODS: Medline, CINAHL, Scopus and the Cochrane Library were searched to access relevant studies published between 1966 and 2011. Inclusion criteria were quantitative studies of critically ill patients with peripheral arterial catheters that required administration sets for intra-arterial pressure monitoring and had a focus on administration sets duration of use. Studies were assessed for quality using either methodological quality assessments from Cochrane guidelines for systematic reviews for randomised controlled trials or with the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for cohort studies. RESULTS: Six studies were selected for review. These included three randomised controlled trials (226 patients) and three cohort studies (219 patients). Cohort studies reported 1-4% catheter-related bloodstream infection and 0-8% infusate-related bloodstream infection when administration sets were changed every 48 hours. Two randomised controlled trials found no difference in infusate-related bloodstream infection (two days: 0%; four to eight days: 1·7%) and found no cases of catheter-related bloodstream infection in any group when administration sets were replaced every 24 or 48 hours. CONCLUSION: There is limited evidence on the optimum duration of administration sets used for peripheral arterial catheters. Large randomised trials of high quality are needed. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This review provides clinicians with comprehensive information about the state of the evidence in relation to the duration of administration sets for peripheral arterial catheters to inform decision-making and further research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".