NCT07817732

Brief Summary

Evidence regarding clinical effectiveness and acceptability of PICC sleeves remain limited. Few randomised controlled trials have evaluated PICC sleeves in routine hospital practice, and there is limited evidence regarding their feasibility, safety and influence on line condition. This pilot randomised controlled trial aims to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and user experience of a protective PICC sleeve among hospitalised patients with PICCs.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
67

participants targeted

Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable

Timeline
Completed

Started Mar 2024

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

Study Start

First participant enrolled

March 21, 2024

Completed
1.3 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

July 10, 2025

Completed
3 months until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

September 25, 2025

Completed
11 months until next milestone

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

September 2, 2026

Completed
12 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

September 14, 2026

Completed
Last Updated

September 14, 2026

Status Verified

September 1, 2025

Enrollment Period

1.3 years

First QC Date

September 2, 2026

Last Update Submit

September 8, 2026

Conditions

Keywords

PICC linePilot studySleeve cover

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Participant Recruitment Rate

    Number of participants recruited over the recruitment period

    16 months

Secondary Outcomes (14)

  • Intervention Adherence

    From enrolment to 7 days after discharge or upon removal, whichever earlier.

  • Retention of Study Participants across 3 Time-points

    From enrolment to 7 days after discharge or upon removal, whichever earlier.

  • Completeness of Data Collected

    From enrolment to 7 days after discharge or upon removal, whichever earlier.

  • Number of Adverse Events

    From enrolment to 7 days after discharge or upon removal, whichever earlier.

  • Patient-Reported Dislodgement Risk

    From enrolment to 7 days after discharge or upon removal, whichever earlier.

  • +9 more secondary outcomes

Other Outcomes (8)

  • Number of Dislodgement Cases

    From enrolment to 7 days after discharge or upon removal, whichever earlier.

  • Dressing Condition

    From enrolment to 7 days after discharge or upon removal, whichever earlier.

  • CHG Gel Condition

    From enrolment to 7 days after discharge or upon removal, whichever earlier.

  • +5 more other outcomes

Study Arms (2)

The control group

NO INTERVENTION

The control group used the standard securement dressing

The Treatment group

EXPERIMENTAL

The treatment group received appropriately sized PICC sleeve cover in addition to standard device securement practices.

Other: Novel PICC Sleeve Cover

Interventions

The novel PICC sleeve cover would be applied on the intervention group in addition to standard PICC securement practices.

The Treatment group

Eligibility Criteria

Age21 Years - 100 Years
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • Adult patients receiving PICC placement for various medical conditions

You may not qualify if:

  • Patients with known allergies to materials in the PICC sleeve
  • Patients contraindicated for PICC placement
  • Patients who are aggressive and/or restless
  • Patients whose skin condition is unsuitable for CHG gel dressing application (e.g. skin with eczema plaques, bullous pemphigoid)
  • Patients who have no mental capacity to give consent

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Changi General Hospital

Singapore, 529889, Singapore

Location

Related Publications (9)

  • Karpanen T, Casey A, Whitehouse T, Nightingale P, Das I, Elliott TS. Abstracts from the 3rd International Conference on Prevention and Infection Control (ICPIC 2015). Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2015 Jun 16;4 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):I1-P308. doi: 10.1186/2047-2994-4-s1-i1. No abstract available.

    PMID: 28256991BACKGROUND
  • Chan RJ, Northfield S, Larsen E, Mihala G, Ullman A, Hancock P, Marsh N, Gavin N, Wyld D, Allworth A, Russell E, Choudhury MA, Flynn J, Rickard CM. Central venous Access device SeCurement And Dressing Effectiveness for peripherally inserted central catheters in adult acute hospital patients (CASCADE): a pilot randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2017 Oct 4;18(1):458. doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-2207-x.

    PMID: 28978332BACKGROUND
  • Dong H, Zhu Y, Zhang X, Yin X, Liu F. Chest CT tomography vs. intracavitary electrocardiogram guidance in predicting the length of PICC placement. BMC Surg. 2022 May 19;22(1):197. doi: 10.1186/s12893-022-01604-0.

    PMID: 35590297BACKGROUND
  • Grau D, Clarivet B, Lotthe A, Bommart S, Parer S. Complications with peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) used in hospitalized patients and outpatients: a prospective cohort study. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2017 Jan 28;6:18. doi: 10.1186/s13756-016-0161-0. eCollection 2017.

    PMID: 28149507BACKGROUND
  • Moureau N, Lamperti M, Kelly LJ, Dawson R, Elbarbary M, van Boxtel AJ, Pittiruti M. Evidence-based consensus on the insertion of central venous access devices: definition of minimal requirements for training. Br J Anaesth. 2013 Mar;110(3):347-56. doi: 10.1093/bja/aes499. Epub 2013 Jan 29.

    PMID: 23361124BACKGROUND
  • O'Grady NP, Alexander M, Burns LA, Dellinger EP, Garland J, Heard SO, Lipsett PA, Masur H, Mermel LA, Pearson ML, Raad II, Randolph AG, Rupp ME, Saint S; Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC) (Appendix 1). Summary of recommendations: Guidelines for the Prevention of Intravascular Catheter-related Infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2011 May;52(9):1087-99. doi: 10.1093/cid/cir138. No abstract available.

    PMID: 21467014BACKGROUND
  • Yu K, Li J, Zhang D, Liu B, Wang K, Liu W, Shi Y, Zhao Y, Liu Y, Guo N, Sun W. Types of peripherally inserted central catheters and the risk of unplanned removals in patients: A prospective cohort study. Int J Nurs Stud. 2024 Jan;149:104621. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2023.104621. Epub 2023 Oct 12.

    PMID: 37922685BACKGROUND
  • Xu B, Zhang J, Hou J, Ma M, Gong Z, Tang S. Nurses' Attitudes and Knowledge of Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Maintenance in Primary Hospitals in China: A Cross-Sectional Survey. Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2020 Jul 28;13:903-913. doi: 10.2147/RMHP.S250741. eCollection 2020.

    PMID: 32801965BACKGROUND
  • Rickard CM, Marsh NM, Webster J, Gavin NC, Chan RJ, McCarthy AL, Mollee P, Ullman AJ, Kleidon T, Chopra V, Zhang L, McGrail MR, Larsen E, Choudhury MA, Keogh S, Alexandrou E, McMillan DJ, Mervin MC, Paterson DL, Cooke M, Ray-Barruel G, Castillo MI, Hallahan A, Corley A, Geoffrey Playford E. Peripherally InSerted CEntral catheter dressing and securement in patients with cancer: the PISCES trial. Protocol for a 2x2 factorial, superiority randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open. 2017 Jun 15;7(6):e015291. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015291.

    PMID: 28619777BACKGROUND

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
NONE
Purpose
PREVENTION
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Model Details: Pilot single-centre, parallel-group randomised controlled trial.
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

September 2, 2026

First Posted

September 14, 2026

Study Start

March 21, 2024

Primary Completion

July 10, 2025

Study Completion

September 25, 2025

Last Updated

September 14, 2026

Record last verified: 2025-09

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will not share

Legal/Regulatory: Data protection laws, consent limitations, institutional policies Commercial: Proprietary concerns, competitive advantage, patent issues Ethical: Privacy concerns, insufficient original consent, ethics approval scope

Locations