Comparing Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters to Long Peripheral Catheters in Pediatrics
NCT ID: NCT05346406
Last Updated: 2025-06-17
Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
35 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2022-08-10
2023-08-10
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Closed Intravenous Catheter System on Catheter Success, Length of Stay and Complications
NCT05769452
Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Bundle
NCT07249255
Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Insertion Site and Complication Rate in Neonates
NCT03474978
A Randomized Controlled Trial to Demonstrate the Safety and Efficacy of the OptiVein IV Catheter In a Pediatric Population
NCT02265380
Catheter Resistance Monitoring to Predict Catheter-Associated Adverse Events in Children and Adolescents
NCT01737554
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The overall objective of this application is to test the feasibility of a full-scale effectiveness trial comparing PICCs to LPCs and identify a population in which a LPC would be a safe and effective alternative to a PICC. In a prior study, our group showed that as many as 139 PICCs over a one-year period were placed at our local institution in children that (1) did not require central venous access for administration of peripherally incompatible infusate, (2) had the VAD in for \< 14 days, and (3) did not discharge home with the VAD, but because of PICC placement for vascular access these children were at risk for CLABSI and VTE. The pediatric population satisfying the above conditions is the target of our pilot trial. A LPC program was introduced at our local institution in 2019 with initiation in the intensive care units and plans to expand the program to the whole hospital by the fall of 2021. In our initial group of 20 successfully placed LPCs, there were no severe complications (VTE and CLABSI).
The aims of this pilot, randomized controlled trial are:
Aim 1: To assess the feasibility of a full-scale effectiveness trial comparing PICCs to LPCs in hospitalized pediatric patients in need of non-central, medium-term vascular access (5-14 days anticipated need).
Hypothesis: Feasibility of a full-scale effectiveness trial will be established by demonstrating that \> 70% of eligible patients agree to enrollment and randomization, \> 80% of randomized patients receive the assigned intervention, \> 80% of providers involved find the study acceptable, and \< 5% of data are missing.
Aim 2: To identify a population in which a LPC is a safe and effective alternative to a PICC for vascular access in hospitalized pediatric patients age \> 2 years, in need of non-central, medium-term access.
Hypothesis: LPCs are non-inferior to PICCs for delivery of peripherally compatible infusate needed for 5-14 days in hospitalized pediatric patients. The investigators plan to determine the time-to-removal of the VAD, both secondary to completion of therapy and secondary to complications. Safety will be assessed by measuring complication rate (e.g., VTE, CLABSI, occlusion, dislodgement, phlebitis).
Aim 3: To engage patients and families as advisors in vascular access device selection.
The investigators will describe the patient and family experience with device placement and maintenance as well as perceived patient and parent insertion-related and sedation-related distress. Mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative analysis) will be used for this aim.
The results of this study will guide the design of a full-scale effectiveness clinical trial comparing PICCs and LPCs in pediatric patients that require medium-term, non-central venous access. The investigators will identify patient characteristics and clinical situations in which LPCs are safe and effective alternatives to PICCs, allowing us to take the next step to reduce PICC use and the associated complications. The family and patient experience with VADs will add essential information that will guide device selection and future research on patient-centered outcomes. Our work will add to ongoing efforts to improve health care quality and safety in pediatrics.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter, Randomized (PICC R)
Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter
Bard 3fr, 4fr or 6fr; Cook 4fr; or Medcomp 1.9fr and 2.6fr
Midline Catheter, Randomized (MC R)
Also known as long peripheral catheter (LPC)
Midline Catheter
Bard Powerglide 8 cm midline catheter
Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter, Non-randomized (PICC NR)
Observational only arm
No interventions assigned to this group
Midline Catheter, Non-Randomized (MC NR)
Observational only arm
No interventions assigned to this group
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Midline Catheter
Bard Powerglide 8 cm midline catheter
Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter
Bard 3fr, 4fr or 6fr; Cook 4fr; or Medcomp 1.9fr and 2.6fr
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
1. anticipated length of intravenous treatment of 5-14 days AND
2. peripherally compatible infusate AND
3. VAD not needed at discharge
Exclusion Criteria
* active bacteremia or VTE at site where device would be placed
* urgent need of vascular access (within 4 hours)
2 Years
17 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Medical College of Wisconsin
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Alina Burek
Assistant Professor
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Alina Burek
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Medical College of Wisconsin
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Children's Wisconsin
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Paterson RS, Chopra V, Brown E, Kleidon TM, Cooke M, Rickard CM, Bernstein SJ, Ullman AJ. Selection and Insertion of Vascular Access Devices in Pediatrics: A Systematic Review. Pediatrics. 2020 Jun;145(Suppl 3):S243-S268. doi: 10.1542/peds.2019-3474H.
Ullman AJ, Marsh N, Mihala G, Cooke M, Rickard CM. Complications of Central Venous Access Devices: A Systematic Review. Pediatrics. 2015 Nov;136(5):e1331-44. doi: 10.1542/peds.2015-1507. Epub 2015 Oct 12.
Ullman AJ, Bernstein SJ, Brown E, Aiyagari R, Doellman D, Faustino EVS, Gore B, Jacobs JP, Jaffray J, Kleidon T, Mahajan PV, McBride CA, Morton K, Pitts S, Prentice E, Rivard DC, Shaughnessy E, Stranz M, Wolf J, Cooper DS, Cooke M, Rickard CM, Chopra V. The Michigan Appropriateness Guide for Intravenous Catheters in Pediatrics: miniMAGIC. Pediatrics. 2020 Jun;145(Suppl 3):S269-S284. doi: 10.1542/peds.2019-3474I.
Gibson C, Connolly BL, Moineddin R, Mahant S, Filipescu D, Amaral JG. Peripherally inserted central catheters: use at a tertiary care pediatric center. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013 Sep;24(9):1323-31. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2013.04.010. Epub 2013 Jul 19.
Burek AG, Parker J, Bentzien R, Talbert L, Havas M, Hanson SJ. The Development of a Long Peripheral Catheter Program at a Large Pediatric Academic Center: A Pilot Study. Hosp Pediatr. 2020 Oct;10(10):897-901. doi: 10.1542/hpeds.2020-0181.
Noonan PJ, Hanson SJ, Simpson PM, Dasgupta M, Petersen TL. Comparison of Complication Rates of Central Venous Catheters Versus Peripherally Inserted Central Venous Catheters in Pediatric Patients. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2018 Dec;19(12):1097-1105. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0000000000001707.
Xu T, Kingsley L, DiNucci S, Messer G, Jeong JH, Morgan B, Shutt K, Yassin MH. Safety and utilization of peripherally inserted central catheters versus midline catheters at a large academic medical center. Am J Infect Control. 2016 Dec 1;44(12):1458-1461. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2016.09.010.
Chenoweth KB, Guo JW, Chan B. The Extended Dwell Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Is an Alternative Method of NICU Intravenous Access. Adv Neonatal Care. 2018 Aug;18(4):295-301. doi: 10.1097/ANC.0000000000000515.
Kleidon TM, Schults JA, Wainwright C, Mihala G, Gibson V, Saiyed M, Byrnes J, Cattanach P, Macfarlane F, Graham N, Shevill E, Ullman AJ. Comparison of midline catheters and peripherally inserted central catheters to reduce the need for general anesthesia in children with respiratory disease: A feasibility randomized controlled trial. Paediatr Anaesth. 2021 Sep;31(9):985-995. doi: 10.1111/pan.14229. Epub 2021 Jun 21.
Qian SY, Horn MT, Barnes R, Armstrong D. The use of 8-cm 22G Seldinger catheters for intravenous access in children with cystic fibrosis. J Vasc Access. 2014 Sep-Oct;15(5):415-7. doi: 10.5301/jva.5000274. Epub 2014 Jul 4.
Pacilli M, Bradshaw CJ, Clarke SA. Use of 8-cm 22G-long peripheral cannulas in pediatric patients. J Vasc Access. 2018 Sep;19(5):496-500. doi: 10.1177/1129729818761278. Epub 2018 Mar 12.
Paladini A, Chiaretti A, Sellasie KW, Pittiruti M, Vento G. Ultrasound-guided placement of long peripheral cannulas in children over the age of 10 years admitted to the emergency department: a pilot study. BMJ Paediatr Open. 2018 Mar 28;2(1):e000244. doi: 10.1136/bmjpo-2017-000244. eCollection 2018.
Provided Documents
Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.
Document Type: Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
MCW2022
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.