Primary analysis: less vs more frequent: Catheter‐related BSI as defined using criteria specified by Maki 2006; Mermel 2009; and O'Grady 2002
Primary analysis: less showed no clear difference in catheter‐related BSI as defined using criteria specified by Maki… compared with more frequent (low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Primary analysis: less vs more frequent Catheter‐related BSI as defined using criteria specified by Maki 2006; Mermel 2009; and O'Grady 2002 · patients with intravenous administration set replacement Primary analysis: less showed no clear difference in catheter‐related BSI as defined using criteria specified by Maki… compared with more frequent (low certainty). Optimal timing for intravascular administration set replacement (2013) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 1.06 [0.66, 1.68] | 8 studies · 1794 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Optimal timing for intravascular administration set replacement 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.