MyMedR

Displaying all 3 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Fulltext Peripheral Intravenous Catheterisation in Obstetric Patients in the Hand or Forearm Vein: A Randomised Trial

Tan PC, Mackeen A, Khong SY, Omar SZ, Noor Azmi MA

Sci Rep, 2016 Mar 18;6:23223.
PMID: 26987593 DOI: 10.1038/srep23223

A peripheral intravenous catheter is often inserted as part of care during labour. The catheter is inserted into the back of the hand or lower forearm vein in usual practice. There is no trial data to guide the care provider on which is the better insertion site in any clinical setting. 307 women admitted to the labour ward who required insertion of intravenous catheter were randomised to back of hand or lower forearm vein catheter insertion. Catheter insertion is by junior to mid-grade providers. We evaluated insertion success at the first attempt, pain during insertion and catheter replacement due to malfunction as main outcomes. After catheter removal, we recorded patient satisfaction with site, future site preference and insertion site swelling, bruising, tenderness, vein thrombosis and pain. Insertion of a catheter into back of hand vein is more likely to be successful at the first attempt. Insertion pain score, catheter replacement rate, patient satisfaction, patient fidelity to site in a future insertion and insertion site complications rate are not different between trial arms. In conclusion, both insertion sites are suitable; the back of the hand vein maybe easier to cannulate and seems to be preferred by our frontline providers.

Matched MeSH terms: Catheterization, Peripheral/instrumentation
Establishing learning curve for Tenckhoff catheter insertion by interventional nephrologist using CUSUM analysis: how many procedures and in which situation?

Goh BL, Ganeshadeva Yudisthra M, Lim TO

Semin Dial, 2009 Mar-Apr;22(2):199-203.
PMID: 19426429 DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-139X.2008.00536.x

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) catheter insertion success rate is known to vary among different operators, and peritoneoscope PD catheter insertion demands mastery of a steep learning curve. Defining a learning curve using a continuous monitoring tool such as a Cumulative Summation (CUSUM) chart is useful for planning training programs. We aimed to analyze the learning curve of a trainee nephrologist in performing peritoneoscope PD catheter implantation with CUSUM chart. This was a descriptive single-center study using collected data from all PD patients who underwent peritoneoscope PD catheter insertion in our hospital. CUSUM model was used to evaluate the learning curve for peritoneoscope PD catheter insertion. Unacceptable primary failure rate (i.e., catheter malfunction within 1 month of insertion) was defined at >40% and acceptable performance was defined at <25%. CUSUM chart showed the learning curve of a trainee in acquiring new skill. As the trainee became more skillful with training, the CUSUM curve flattened. Technical proficiency of the trainee nephrologist in performing peritoneoscope Tenckhoff catheter insertion (<25% primary catheter malfunction) was attained after 23 procedures. We also noted earlier in our program that Tenckhoff catheters directed to the right iliac fossae had poorer survival as compared to catheters directed to the left iliac fossae. Survival of catheters directed to the left iliac fossae was 94.6% while the survival for catheters directed to the right iliac fossae was 48.6% (p < 0.01). We advocate that quality control of Tenckhoff catheter insertion is performed using CUSUM charting as described to monitor primary catheter dysfunction (i.e., failure of catheter function within 1 month of insertion), primary leak (i.e., within 1 month of catheter insertion), and primary peritonitis (i.e., within 2 weeks of catheter insertion).

Matched MeSH terms: Catheterization, Peripheral/instrumentation
Effect of infusion set replacement intervals on catheter-related bloodstream infections (RSVP): a randomised, controlled, equivalence (central venous access device)-non-inferiority (peripheral arterial catheter) trial

Rickard CM, Marsh NM, Larsen EN, McGrail MR, Graves N, Runnegar N, et al.

Lancet, 2021 04 17;397(10283):1447-1458.
PMID: 33865494 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00351-2

BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of infusion set use to prevent life-threatening catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) is unclear. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and costs of 7-day (intervention) versus 4-day (control) infusion set replacement to prevent CRBSI in patients with central venous access devices (tunnelled cuffed, non-tunnelled, peripherally inserted, and totally implanted) and peripheral arterial catheters.
METHODS: We did a randomised, controlled, assessor-masked trial at ten Australian hospitals. Our hypothesis was CRBSI equivalence for central venous access devices and non-inferiority for peripheral arterial catheters (both 2% margin). Adults and children with expected greater than 24 h central venous access device-peripheral arterial catheter use were randomly assigned (1:1; stratified by hospital, catheter type, and intensive care unit or ward) by a centralised, web-based service (concealed before allocation) to infusion set replacement every 7 days, or 4 days. This included crystalloids, non-lipid parenteral nutrition, and medication infusions. Patients and clinicians were not masked, but the primary outcome (CRBSI) was adjudicated by masked infectious diseases physicians. The analysis was modified intention to treat (mITT). This study is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12610000505000 and is complete.
FINDINGS: Between May 30, 2011, and Dec, 9, 2016, from 6007 patients assessed, we assigned 2944 patients to 7-day (n=1463) or 4-day (n=1481) infusion set replacement, with 2941 in the mITT analysis. For central venous access devices, 20 (1·78%) of 1124 patients (7-day group) and 16 (1·46%) of 1097 patients (4-day group) had CRBSI (absolute risk difference [ARD] 0·32%, 95% CI -0·73 to 1·37). For peripheral arterial catheters, one (0·28%) of 357 patients in the 7-day group and none of 363 patients in the 4-day group had CRBSI (ARD 0·28%, -0·27% to 0·83%). There were no treatment-related adverse events.
INTERPRETATION: Infusion set use can be safely extended to 7 days with resultant cost and workload reductions.
FUNDING: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

Matched MeSH terms: Catheterization, Peripheral/instrumentation*

Filters

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links