|
A Randomized Evaluation of the Effect of Routine Normal Saline Flush Versus Heparinized Saline Solution in Groshong and Groshong PICC Catheters Clinical Trials Information presented on Clinical Trials Search isn't designed to be a substitute for certified healthcare advice, travels to or professional assistance using a genuine medical doctor. We are not physicians. Always confer with your dr. about A Randomized Evaluation of the Effect of Routine Normal Saline Flush Versus Heparinized Saline Solution in Groshong and Groshong PICC Catheters conditions. Clinical Trials Search.org is a site devoted to listing clinical research studies in human subjects. A Randomized Evaluation of the Effect of Routine Normal Saline Flush Versus Heparinized Saline Solution in Groshong and Groshong PICC Catheters Clinical research trials and A Randomized Evaluation of the Effect of Routine Normal Saline Flush Versus Heparinized Saline Solution in Groshong and Groshong PICC Catheters medical trials happen in hundreds of places across the United States. A clinical trial or clinical study is a research project with human volunteer subjects. Clinical drug trials and pharmaceutical clinical trials usually measure the effectualness of new drugs. The intention of the studies / undertakings is to solve certain human healthcare questions. Clinical trials are a popular manner for mDs, government agencies, and private sector companies to locate treatments for all forms of circumstances, such as A Randomized Evaluation of the Effect of Routine Normal Saline Flush Versus Heparinized Saline Solution in Groshong and Groshong PICC Catheters. A Randomized Evaluation of the Effect of Routine Normal Saline Flush Versus Heparinized Saline Solution in Groshong and Groshong PICC Catheters Clinical Trials and other clinical trials allow for volunteers to undergo medical treatment choices before they are available to the general public. Some times the human subjects get treatment for free of charge, and sometimes they are paid for their time. Occasionally there is a cost for a A Randomized Evaluation of the Effect of Routine Normal Saline Flush Versus Heparinized Saline Solution in Groshong and Groshong PICC Catheters clinical trial. Participants frequently get the best healthcare available for their A Randomized Evaluation of the Effect of Routine Normal Saline Flush Versus Heparinized Saline Solution in Groshong and Groshong PICC Catheters condition. Risks are a reality, nonetheless, and can include extra or frequent physician trips, medical risks (possibly life-jeopardising), and/or the treatment being ineffective. Trials are federally governed with exacting guidelines to protect clinical trials subjects.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home > "A" Clinical Trials Conditions > A Randomized Evaluation of the Effect of Routine Normal Saline Flush Versus Heparinized Saline Solution in Groshong and Groshong PICC Catheters  A Randomized Evaluation of the Effect of Routine Normal Saline Flush Versus Heparinized Saline Solution in Groshong and Groshong PICC Catheters
A Randomized Evaluation of the Effect of Routine Normal Saline Flush Versus Heparinized Saline Solution in Groshong and Groshong PICC Catheters
For Condition: Catheters, indwelling,Thrombosis
Status: Completed
Sponsor(s): Warren G Magnuson Clinical Center (CC) ,
Synopsis: The Groshong and Groshong PICC catheters are popular venous access devices because they are maintained with only weekly saline flushes. In a recent study, however, we found an apparent decrease in the rate of withdrawal occlusion in Groshong catheters flushed weekly with heparinized saline. However, a randomized trial is necessary to confirm this impression. In the current study as many as 66 patients will be randomized to each of two treatment arms. The Groshong catheters of one group will be flushed with saline only and the other group with heparinized saline. A comparison will be made between the frequency with which urokinase is used in the two groups to treat withdrawal occlusion during the first three months of catheterization. Groshong catheters using saline flushes will be compared to Groshong catheters using heparinized saline flushes and Groshong PICC catheters using saline flushes will be compared to Groshong PICC catheters using heparinized saline flushes. Data will be analyzed using Fisher's exact test.
Details: The Groshong and Groshong PICC catheters are popular venous access devices because they are maintained with only weekly saline flushes. In a recent study, however, we found an apparent decrease in the rate of withdrawal occlusion in Groshong catheters flushed weekly with heparinized saline. However, a randomized trial is necessary to confirm this impression. In the current study as many as 66 patients will be randomized to each of two treatment arms. The Groshong catheters of one group will be flushed with saline only and the other group with heparinized saline. A comparison will be made between the frequency with which urokinase is used in the two groups to treat withdrawal occlusion during the first three months of catheterization. Groshong catheters using saline flushes will be compared to Groshong catheters using heparinized saline flushes and Groshong PICC catheters using saline flushes will be compared to Groshong PICC catheters using heparinized saline flushes. Data will be analyzed using Fisher's exact test.
Eligibility:
Study Type: Observational, Natural History
Minimum Age/Maximum Age: /
Genders: Both
Protocol Entry Criteria: Adult subjects enrolled in approved protocols of the NCI in the CC or under treatment at the National Naval Medical Center who are planned to have Groshong Catheters used as part of their cancer treatment. No subjects with a history of allergy to heparin. No abnormal PT or PTT. No subjects on anticoagulant therapy. No history of heparin induced thrombocytopenia.
Total Enrollment: 132
Location and Contact Information:
Warren G. Magnuson Clinical Center (CC)
Bethesda, Maryland, 20892
United States
Additional Information:
Study ID Numbers: 960053; 96-CC-0053
Study Start Date: January 25, 1996
Record last reviewed: December 21, 1999
Additional information available at: clinicaltrials.gov
Clinicaltrials.gov Reference link: NCT00001518
Other Catheters, Indwelling Studies:
1. Lupus Cohort--Thrombotic Events and Coronary Artery Disease
2. Heparin versus Lepirudin Flushes in Preventing Blockage of Venous Access Devices
3. Evaluation of Argatroban Injection in Pediatric Patients Requiring Anticoagulant Alternatives to Heparin
4. Inflammation Markers Over Time in Cardiovascular Disease
5. Anticoagulant Therapy with Bivalirudin in the Performance of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in patients with Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia (AT BAT, First Inning)
Related Studies:
Other Catheters, indwelling Clinical Trials
Other Maryland Clinical Trials
Other Bethesda Clinical Trials
A Randomized Evaluation of the Effect of Routine Normal Saline Flush Versus Heparinized Saline Solution in Groshong and Groshong PICC Catheters
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
