Critically appraise the quality of evidence from ‘Rickard, C.M., Webster, J., Wallis, M.C., Marsh, N., McGrail, M.R., French, V., Foster, L., Gallagher, P., Gowardman, J.R., Zhang, L., McClymont, A., & Whitby, M. (2012). Routine versus clinically indicated replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters: a randomised controlled equivalence trial. Lancet, 380, 1066-1074. The critique should focus on the methodology, results, implications for clinical practice and further research. Use the structured format for critique provided on the vUWS site as a guide for the essay. Please choose the correct critique check list (eg. Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., & Moher, D. (2010). CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Open Medicine, 4(1):E60.) for the research design of the study being evaluated
Some error has occured.