scholarly journals Heparin for prolonging peripheral intravenous catheter use in neonates: a randomized controlled trial

2014 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 274-277 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Upadhyay ◽  
K K Verma ◽  
P Lal ◽  
D Chawla ◽  
V Sreenivas
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intravenous Catheter ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Peripheral Intravenous Catheter

scholarly journals Routine Replacement versus Clinical Monitoring of Peripheral Intravenous Catheters in a Regional Hospital in the Home Program A Randomized Controlled Trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 30 (9) ◽  
pp. 915-917 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia Van Donk ◽  
Claire M. Rickard ◽  
Matthew R. McGrail ◽  
Glenn Doolan
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Clinical Indication ◽  
Intravenous Catheter ◽  
Home Setting ◽  
Home Program ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Peripheral Intravenous Catheter ◽  
Intravenous Catheters

This randomized, controlled trial involving 316 patients in the home setting found no difference in the rate of phlebitis and/or occlusion among patients for whom a peripheral intravenous catheter was routinely resited at 72-96 hours and those for whom it was replaced only on clinical indication (76.8 events per 1,000 device-days vs 87.3 events per 1,000 device-days; P = .71). There were no bloodstream infections.

scholarly journals Risk Factors for Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Failure: A Multivariate Analysis of Data from a Randomized Controlled Trial

2014 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 63-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marianne C. Wallis ◽  
Matthew McGrail ◽  
Joan Webster ◽  
Nicole Marsh ◽  
John Gowardman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Intravenous Catheter ◽  
Antecubital Fossa ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Peripheral Intravenous Catheter

Objective.To assess the relative importance of independent risk factors for peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) failure.Methods.Secondary data analysis from a randomized controlled trial of PIVC dwell time. The Prentice, Williams, and Peterson statistical model was used to identify and compare risk factors for phlebitis, occlusion, and accidental removal.Setting.Three acute care hospitals in Queensland, Australia.Participants.The trial included 3,283 adult medical and surgical patients (5,907 catheters) with a PIVC with greater than 4 days of expected use.Results.Modifiable risk factors for occlusion included hand, antecubital fossa, or upper arm insertion compared with forearm (hazard ratio [HR], 1.47 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.28–1.68], 1.27 [95% CI, 1.08–1.49], and 1.25 [95% CI, 1.04–1.50], respectively); and for phlebitis, larger diameter PIVC (HR, 1.48 [95% CI, 1.08–2.03]). PIVCs inserted by the operating and radiology suite staff had lower occlusion risk than ward insertions (HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.67–0.94]). Modifiable risks for accidental removal included hand or antecubital fossa insertion compared with forearm (HR, 2.45 [95% CI, 1.93–3.10] and 1.65 [95% CI, 1.23–2.22], respectively), clinical staff insertion compared with intravenous service (HR, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.30–2.20]); and smaller PIVC diameter (HR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.02–1.61]). Female sex was a nonmodifiable factor associated with an increased risk of both phlebitis (HR, 1.64 [95% CI, 1.28–2.09]) and occlusion (HR, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.30–1.61]).Conclusions.PIVC survival is improved by preferential forearm insertion, selection of appropriate PIVC diameter, and insertion by intravenous teams and other specialists.Trial Registration.The original randomized controlled trial on which this secondary analysis is based is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (http://www.anzctr.org.au; ACTRN12608000445370).

SECUREment bundles to prevent peripheral intravenous catheter failure—the SECURE-PIVC trial: study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (19) ◽  
pp. S40-S46
Author(s):  
Amanda Corley ◽  
Amanda J Ullman ◽  
Nicole Marsh ◽  
Larsen Emily N. ◽  
Gabor Mihala ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Standard Care ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Tertiary Hospital ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Rigorous Testing ◽  
Peripheral Intravenous Catheter ◽  
Catheter Failure ◽  
English Speaking ◽  
Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are widely used, but failure is unacceptably common with up to 69% failing before treatment is complete. PIVC securement reduces failure, but the optimal way to achieve this is unclear. Tapes and supplementary securement products are widely used, however rigorous testing of these to reduce PIVC failure remains unexplored. Methods and analysis In adult medical-surgical wards at a tertiary hospital, this pilot randomized controlled trial tests standard care (bordered polyurethane dressing plus nonsterile tape over the extension tubing) against two securement interventions (intervention one: standard care plus two sterile tape strips over the PIVC hub; intervention two: intervention one plus a tubular bandage). Patients >18 years of age requiring a PIVC for >24 hours are eligible. Patients with laboratory-confirmed positive blood cultures within 24 hours of screening, known allergy to study products, current or high-risk of skin tear, or non-English speaking without interpreter are excluded. Sample size is 35 per trial arm, and central randomization is computer-generated with allocation concealed until entry. Patients and clinical staff cannot be blinded to treatment allocation. However, infection outcomes are assessed by a blinded investigator. Primary outcome is study feasibility. Secondary outcomes (PIVC failure, dwell time, skin adverse events, PIVC colonization, and cost) are compared between groups. Feasibility outcomes are reported descriptively. Ethics and trial commencement Ethical approvals were received from Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital (HREC/18/QRBW/44571) and Griffith University (2018/1000). Trial commencement was May 2019. Trial registration: ACTRN12619000026123.

Ultrasound-guided peripheral intravenous catheters insertion in patient with difficult vascular access: Short axis/out-of-plane versus long axis/in-plane, a randomized controlled trial

2021 ◽  
pp. 112972982110069
Author(s):  
Daniele Privitera ◽  
Annamaria Mazzone ◽  
Federico Pierotti ◽  
Chiara Airoldi ◽  
Alessandro Galazzi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Success Rate ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Short Axis ◽  
Ultrasound Guided ◽  
Intravenous Catheter ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Ultrasound Technique ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Local Complications ◽  
Peripheral Intravenous Catheter

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the rate of successful peripheral cannulation between short-axis and long-axis ultrasound guided techniques. Methods: A single-center, two-arm randomized controlled, intention-to-treat, open-label study was conducted at the Emergency Department, between August and November 2020. Patients requiring a peripheral intravenous catheter insertion and identified as having a difficult intravascular access, were enrolled and followed for up to 96 h. The primary endpoint was the correct placement of the peripheral intravenous catheter. The secondary endpoints were number of venipunctures, intra-procedural pain, local complications, and positive blood return during the follow up. Results: A total of 283 patients were enrolled: 141 subjects were randomized to the short-axis and 142 to the long-axis group. Success rate was 96.45% (135/141; 95% CI, 91.92%–98.84%) in the short-axis group compared with 92.25% (132/142; 95% CI, 86.56%–96.07%) in the long-axis group ( p = 0.126). No significant differences were found in terms of intraprocedural pain and local complications. Higher rate of positive blood return at 72 h [3/17 long-axis, 14/17 short-axis ( p = 0.005)] and 96 h [1/10 long-axis, 9/10 short-axis 96 h, ( p = 0.022)] was found for the short-axis group. Conclusions: No differences were found between short-axis and long-axis techniques in terms of success rate, intraprocedural pain, and local complications. Despite this, a slightly higher success rate, a lower number of venipunctures, and a higher rate of positive blood return at 72 and 96 h together with an easier ultrasound technique could suggest a short-axis approach.

scholarly journals Randomized controlled trial of PosiFlow regulator with infusion clamp for reducing intravenous catheter plugging

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 3135-3141
Author(s):  
Na Mi ◽  
Dahua Lan ◽  
Zhili Zhu ◽  
Fengxia Yang ◽  
Zhenling Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intravenous Catheter ◽  
Randomized Controlled
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document