These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
147 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15684906)
1. Central vascular access devices in oncology and hematology considered from a different point of view: how do patients experience their vascular access ports? Goossens GA; Vrebos M; Stas M; De Wever I; Frederickx L J Infus Nurs; 2005; 28(1):61-7. PubMed ID: 15684906 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Port navigation: let the journey begin. Arch P Clin J Oncol Nurs; 2007 Aug; 11(4):485-8. PubMed ID: 17723960 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Patient acceptability of three different central venous access devices for the delivery of systemic anticancer therapy: a qualitative study. Ryan C; Hesselgreaves H; Wu O; Moss J; Paul J; Dixon-Hughes J; Germeni E BMJ Open; 2019 Jul; 9(7):e026077. PubMed ID: 31292176 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Totally implantable venous access ports--the patients' point of view. A quality control study. Borst CG; de Kruif AT; van Dam FS; de Graaf PW Cancer Nurs; 1992 Oct; 15(5):378-81. PubMed ID: 1423257 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Long-term, totally implantable central venous access ports connected to a Groshong catheter for chemotherapy of solid tumours: experience from 178 cases using a single type of device. Biffi R; Corrado F; de Braud F; de Lucia F; Scarpa D; Testori A; Orsi F; Bellomi M; Mauri S; Aapro M; Andreoni B Eur J Cancer; 1997 Jul; 33(8):1190-4. PubMed ID: 9301441 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. [Experience with implanted ports for venous access between 2005 and 2012]. Kovács E; Deme E; Bencsik G Orv Hetil; 2014 Jun; 155(25):986-92. PubMed ID: 24936574 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Insertion and placement of central catheters in the oncology patient. Galloway M Semin Oncol Nurs; 2010 May; 26(2):102-12. PubMed ID: 20434643 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Satisfaction versus dissatisfaction with venous access devices in outpatient oncology: a pilot study. Chernecky C Oncol Nurs Forum; 2001; 28(10):1613-6. PubMed ID: 11759308 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Clinical impact of peripherally inserted central catheters vs implanted port catheters in patients with cancer: an open-label, randomised, two-centre trial. Taxbro K; Hammarskjöld F; Thelin B; Lewin F; Hagman H; Hanberger H; Berg S Br J Anaesth; 2019 Jun; 122(6):734-741. PubMed ID: 31005243 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A Questionnaire-based Assessment of the Anxiety, Satisfaction and Discomfort Experienced by Japanese Cancer Patients during the Use of Central Venous Ports. Yagi T; Sakamoto T; Nakai K; Tanizawa M; Okabe T; Hoshikawa N; Kohatada M; Kitagawa F; Hanya R; Kotani M Intern Med; 2016; 55(17):2393-9. PubMed ID: 27580539 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Care and management of patients with skin-tunnelled catheters. Green J Nurs Stand; 2008 Jun 25-Jul 1; 22(42):41-8. PubMed ID: 18649719 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. [Application of long term subcutaneously implanted access into the central veins system of "PORT" type in the Clinic of Pediatry, Pediatric Hematology and Oncology in Zabrze--15 year own observations]. Bucki B; Tomaszewska R; Bubała H; Sońta-Jakimczyk D; Karpe J; Stoksik P Wiad Lek; 2009; 62(2):93-8. PubMed ID: 20141056 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A point prevalence study of cancer nursing practices for managing intravascular devices in an Australian tertiary cancer center. Russell E; Chan RJ; Marsh N; New K Eur J Oncol Nurs; 2014 Jun; 18(3):231-5. PubMed ID: 24373944 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]