| Title |
Spontaneous correction of misplaced peripherally inserted central catheters
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10554-018-1321-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wenfeng Chen, Lianxiang He, Liqing Yue, Mijung Park, Haoyu Deng |
| Abstract |
The purpose of the present study was to examine a new protocol involving the spontaneous correction of the misplaced tip of a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC). Patients with PICCs misplaced in the jugular or contralateral subclavian veins were recruited. All patients underwent chest X-ray (CXR) after 3 days. In addition, those whose PICC tip still was misplaced and received another CXR after 4 days. The functions of the catheters, the subjective feelings of the patients, and local symptoms of the neck and upper anterior chest wall were recorded. Among 866 patients who had PICCs, we observed 22 PICC tips misplaced in the jugular, 3 tips misplaced in the contralateral subclavian vein, and 7 tips misplaced in other locations, which was confirmed by CXR. A total of 22 PICC tips automatically returned to the superior vena cava, which included all 3 tips in the contralateral subclavian vein and 19 tips in the jugular vein. All catheters functioned normally, and the patients had no complaints. In addition, we observed no local symptoms of the neck and upper anterior chest wall. For patients experiencing a PICC misplaced in the jugular and contralateral subclavian veins, there is no need to manually replace. In addition, the function of the catheter can remain normal. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 9 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 56% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 22% |
| Engineering | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 4 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 March 2018.
All research outputs
#17,242,285
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#908
of 2,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#225,756
of 350,479 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
#10
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,012 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 350,479 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.