Mechanical complications of central venous catheters in children: A cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite the numerous advantages of central venous catheters (CVCs), they have been associated with a variety of complications. Surveillance for mechanical complications of CVCs is not routine, so the true incidence and impact of this adverse patient outcome remains unclear. SETTING AND METHODS: Prospectively collected CVC data on mechanical complications were reviewed from a centralized database for all in-hospital patient days at our tertiary-care hospital from January 2001 to June 2016 in patients aged <19 years. Patient demographics, CVC characteristics, and rates of mechanical complications per 1,000 days of catheter use were described. RESULTS: In total, 8,747 CVCs were placed in 5,743 patients during the study period, which captured 780,448 catheter days. The overall mechanical complication rate was 6.1 per 1,000 catheter days (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.9-6.3). The highest complication rates were in nontunneled lines; this was consistent throughout the 15-year study period. Also, 521 CVCs (∼6%) were removed due to mechanical complications before therapy termination. Catheters with tip location in the superior vena cava or right atrium had the fewest complications. CONCLUSIONS: Mechanical complications of CVCs are a common and significant event in the pediatric population. We propose that CVC-associated mechanical complications become a routinely reported patient safety outcome.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".