Evaluating peripheral intravascular catheter insertion, maintenance and removal practices in small hospitals using a standardized audit tool.

Twelve of the fifteen audited hospitals had fewer than 100 beds, so the findings may not represent larger hospitals. Smaller facilities may have shorter patient stays and lower acuity, which can change PIVC use and dwell times. Clinical auditing was frequently retrospective, so missing records may reflect poor documentation rather than poor practice. The study describes practice and complication rates; it does not test an intervention or show that documentation changes improve outcomes. The paper does not state a single total number of PIVCs audited, so the reader must rely on category counts and percentages.

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The supplied article metadata lists non-U.S. government research support, but the text does not name a funder or describe sponsor involvement.

Do not read the 0% bloodstream infection and 5.0% phlebitis rates as proof that PIVC care is safe overall. This was an audit of mostly small hospitals, and missing records may reflect poor documentation rather than poor practice.