Search

Background: In 2016, a UK vessel health and preservation (VHP) framework was developed to support healthcare staff to select the most appropriate vascular access device for patients requiring intravenous therapy. The VHP framework was based on available evidence and expert consensus. The VHP was based on available evidence and expert consensus. Development of the VHP 2020 Framework: A multidisciplinary team reviewed the original UK VHP framework and considered new published evidence, national and international guidelines and expert opinion. A literature search was performed using Cinahl and Medline, incorporating a variety of terms linked to vascular access devices, assessment and selection. Articles published in and after 2014 in English were included. Twelve articles were found to be relevant including three evidence-based guidelines, two randomised control trials and one systematic review. Findings: Three main studies provided the evidence for the update: the MAGIC study that assessed the appropriateness of peripherally inserted central catheters in patients; a study that utilised the 'A-DIVA scale' to predict the likelihood of difficult venous access; and a study that incorporated an 'I-DECIDED tool' for peripheral intravenous catheter assessment and decision-making for device removal. In addition, published guidelines provided evidence that the original advice on appropriate osmolarity of medicines for peripheral administration needed updating. Conclusion: The 2020 UK VHP framework reflects latest evidence-based research and guidelines, providing healthcare staff updated guidance to assist in maintaining good practice in vascular access assessment and device selection and patient safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Vascular access is an important part of many patient care management plans, but has unwanted risks. A working group led by the Infection Prevention Society (IPS) produced a Vessel Health and Preservation (VHP) Framework. Based on current evidence, a framework was developed for frontline staff to assess and select the best vascular access device to meet the individual patient’s needs and to preserve veins for future use. Methods: Using the Outcome Logic Model, we conducted an evaluation of the short- and medium-term outcomes with regards to the impact and success of the VHP Framework. Results: This evaluation found that many respondents were aware of the framework and were using it in a range of different ways. Participants saw the framework as being most beneficial to help decisions on device choice and peripheral vein assessment. However, the framework has not fully reached its intended audience. Discussion: Many positive outcomes were reported as a result of using the VHP Framework including improving clinical practice as it relates to the VHP elements. However, further work is required to find the tools to extend the reach of the framework and assist healthcare teams to be able to fully implement it within their clinical settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]