BMC pediatrics · 2026
Missing data, missed risks: complications and documentation gaps of central venous access devices in pediatric oncology.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Voigt Marie, Rahn Alexandros, Herbach Anna-Lena, Mücke Urs
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Central venous access devices (CVADs) are essential in pediatric oncology but frequently associated with infections, thromboses, and dysfunction. Although structured surveillance may reduce complications, implementation is limited by fragmented documentation across clinical systems.
METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study combining a two-stage interdisciplinary electronic Delphi process with retrospective cohort analysis. Pediatric oncology patients diagnosed between 2020 and 2021 who received a CVAD at our university hospital were included. Data were manually extracted from three hospital information systems. Only the first CVAD per patient was analyzed (n = 112).
RESULTS: Of 219 diagnosed patients, 112 met inclusion criteria, accounting for 126 CVADs. The eDelphi panel identified 30 core surveillance parameters, 23 retrievable from routine records. Complications occurred in 23.2%, most commonly infections leading to premature removal.
CONCLUSIONS: Standardized electronic CVAD documentation could enhance surveillance, improve patient safety, and reduce manual data collection efforts.
METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study combining a two-stage interdisciplinary electronic Delphi process with retrospective cohort analysis. Pediatric oncology patients diagnosed between 2020 and 2021 who received a CVAD at our university hospital were included. Data were manually extracted from three hospital information systems. Only the first CVAD per patient was analyzed (n = 112).
RESULTS: Of 219 diagnosed patients, 112 met inclusion criteria, accounting for 126 CVADs. The eDelphi panel identified 30 core surveillance parameters, 23 retrievable from routine records. Complications occurred in 23.2%, most commonly infections leading to premature removal.
CONCLUSIONS: Standardized electronic CVAD documentation could enhance surveillance, improve patient safety, and reduce manual data collection efforts.