“…While 58% (n = 109) of the initial retrieved citations (n = 189) were level 5 evidence and therefore excluded from the final analysis, some have been used for discussion purposes (EONS, 2007;Schulmeister 2007d;Wengstrom & Marguiles 2008;Perez Fidalgo et al 2012;De Wit et al 2013). The rationale for this being that contemporary practice appears to be guided by publications from national and international societies: the Working Group of the German Cancer Society for Supportive Care in Oncology, Rehabilitation and Social Medicine -ASORS (De Wit et al 2013), the EONS (EONS 2007;Wengstrom & Marguiles 2008;Perez Fidalgo et al 2012), the European Society of Medical Oncology (Perez Fidalgo et al 2012), and the UKNOS (2008) alongside 'expert opinion' from authors such as Langer et al (2000aLanger et al ( ,b, 2001Langer et al ( , 2006Langer et al ( , 2007Langer et al ( , 2009Langer et al ( , 2012, Langer (2008Langer ( , 2010a, Schulmeister (2005, 2007a,b,c,d, 2008, 2009a,b, 2010a,b,c, 2011), Dougherty (2003, 2010, Dougherty and Lister (2008), Dougherty and Oakley (2011), Gault (1993), and Gault and Challands (1997). This would suggest that the management of extravasation continues to remain empirical and based on the expert views of lead opinion makers.…”