Transitioning from Heparin to Saline Locks for Central Venous Access Devices in Oncology: An Evidence-Based Practice Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Central vascular access devices (CVADs) are often essential to the care of patients undergoing long-term cancer treatment. CVAD maintenance is an essential oncology nurse competency. Evidence-based practice (EBP) in flushing and locking help to prevent intraluminal occlusion, a common complication. Heparinized saline (HS) has been the standard locking solution for CVADs. However, research indicates no superiority of HS over normal saline (NS). The objectives of this EBP project were 1) to evaluate whether a significant difference in intraluminal occlusion was associated with the change from HS to NS use for locking CVADs in ambulatory oncology care, and 2) to evaluate the effects of peer nurse mentoring on nurses' and patients' perspectives about the practice change. Analysis of data revealed decreases in alteplase usage after transitioning to NS locking. Patient and nurse surveys indicated that peer nurse mentoring increased nurse and patient confidence and competence in making the practice transition.
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 | 0.056 | 0.100 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".