ABSTRACT
Background: Placing central venous lines under ultrasonographic guidance reduces the complications of the procedure. Aim: To compare prevalences of complications of central venous line placements with or without ultrasonographic guidance. Material and Methods: Descriptive study that contemplated the comparison of two groups of patients subjected to a central venous line placement at a nephrology service for renal replacement therapy. In one group of 100 patients, the line was placed without ultrasonographic guidance between 2008 and 2012. Between 2015 and 2017 the line was placed in 138 patients using ultrasonographic guidance. The prevalences of complications with both types of procedures were recorded. Results: The frequency of complications of procedures with and without ultrasonographic guidance was 0.7 and 18% respectively (prevalence ratio 0.04, 95% confidence interval 0-0.3). Ninety five percent of recorded complications were arterial puncture, followed by hematomas in 10% and pneumothorax in 5%. The higher prevalence of complications was observed in emergency line placement without ultrasonographic guidance. There was a direct association between the number of line placement attempts in a single procedure and the prevalence of complications. Conclusions: Ultrasonographic guidance is associated with a reduction in the prevalence of central venous line complications.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Catheterization, Central Venous/adverse effects , Renal Dialysis/adverse effects , Central Venous Catheters/adverse effects , Intraoperative Complications/etiology , Intraoperative Complications/epidemiology , Pneumothorax/etiology , Pneumothorax/epidemiology , Catheterization, Central Venous/instrumentation , Catheterization, Central Venous/methods , Chile/epidemiology , Prevalence , Cross-Sectional Studies , Renal Dialysis/instrumentation , Renal Dialysis/methods , Ultrasonography, Interventional/methods , Sex Distribution , Hematoma/etiology , Hematoma/epidemiologyABSTRACT
To assess the reporting quality of papers published between 2002-2012 in Chilean dental journals. Methods: Bibliometric analysis of research papers published in indexed Chilean dental journals between 2002-2012. Three calibrated examinators (interoperator- Kappa=.83) assessed 205 papers: 150 case-reports, 37 observational studies and 18 clinical trials. Reporting quality was evaluated using CARE for case reports, STROBE for observational studies and CONSORT for clinical trials. Descriptive statistics were conducted. Results: Case-reports reported 35 percent of the required methodological items; epidemiological research reported 16 percent of required items for Materials and Methods and 10 percent for Results. Clinical research reported 29 percent of required Materials and Methods items and 20 percent of Results items. Conclusion: Case-report, epidemiological and clinician research papers in Chilean dental journals published during the 2002 2012 period are lacking explicit key methodological items, preventing a proper research replication or clinical application of the results...
Evaluar la calidad del reporte de estudios descriptivos, clínicos y reportes de casos publicados enrevistas del área odontológicas chilenas en el periodo 2002-2012. Método: Análisis bibliométrico de las publicaciones en revistas dentales chilenas indizadas del 2002 al 2012. Tres evaluadores calibrados (Kappa intraoperadores=.83) evaluaron205 artículos: 150 reportes de casos, 37 estudios observacionales y 18 ensayos clínicos. La calidad del reporte seevaluó utilizando las pautas CARE para reportes de caso, STROBE para estudios observacionales y CONSORT paraensayos clínicos. Resultados: Los porcentajes de cumplimiento para los aspectos metodológicos por diseño fueron de 35 por ciento para los elementos requeridos en el reporte de caso, del 16 por ciento y 29 por ciento para los materiales y métodos de los estudios observacionales y clínicos; y 10 por ciento y 20 por ciento para los resultados de los estudios observacionales y clínicos. Conclusión: Los artículos del tipo reportes de caso, estudios observacionales y clínicos publicados en revistas del área odontológica chilenas en el período 2002-2012 carecen del informe de elementos básicos del diseño y resultados, lo que dificulta su replicabilidad así como su aplicación clínica...