Search

Introduction: Labor is both a physiological and physical activity that requires energy expenditure by the woman. Despite this, women are often fasted in labor, with hydration requirements addressed predominantly by intravenous therapy. Little is known about how best to manage this in nulliparous women undergoing induction of labor, who can be prone to lengthy labors. Therefore, we undertook a systematic review and meta‐analysis to determine the effects of intravenous hydration regimens on nulliparous women undergoing induction of labor. Material and methods: A systematic review and meta‐analysis were conducted. Databases searched were PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science using the search strategy combination of associated key concepts for intravenous therapy and nulliparous laboring women. The primary outcome was excessive neonatal weight loss. Meta‐analyses for categorical outcomes included estimates of odds ratio (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) calculated; and for continuous outcomes the standardized mean difference, each with its 95% CI. Heterogeneity was assessed visually and by using the χ2 statistic and I2 with significance being set at p < 0.10. Results: A total of 1512 studies were located and following screening, three studies met the eligibility criteria. No studies reported excessive neonatal weight loss. Increased rates of intravenous therapy (250 mL/h vs. 125 mL/h) during labor were not found to reduce the overall length of labor (mean difference −0.07 h, 95% CI −0.27 to 0.13 h) or reduce cesarean sections (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.45–1.23), when women were not routinely fasted. Conclusions: Our review found no significant improvements for nulliparous women who received higher intravenous fluid volumes when undergoing induction of labor and were not routinely fasted. However, data are limited, and further research is needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: There is a lack of international consensus as to whether high‐ or low‐level disinfection (HLD or LLD) is required for ultrasound (US) transducers used during percutaneous procedures. This study compared the effectiveness of LLD to HLD on US transducers contaminated with microorganisms from skin. Methods: Two identical linear US transducers repeatedly underwent either LLD or HLD during the study. Randomization determined which of these transducers was applied to left and right forearms of each participant. Swabs taken from transducers before and after reprocessing were plated then incubated for 4–5 days, after which colony forming units (CFU) were counted and identified. The primary hypothesis was the difference in the proportion of US transducers having no CFUs remaining after LLD and HLD would be less than or equal to the noninferiority margin of −5%. Results: Of the 654 recruited participants 73% (n = 478) had microbial growth from both transducers applied to their left and right forearms before reprocessing. These were included in the paired noninferiority statistical analysis where, after disinfection, all CFUs were eliminated in 100% (95% CI: 99.4–100.0%) of HLD transducer samples (n = 478) and 99.0% (95% CI: 97.6–99.7%) of LLD transducer samples (n = 473). The paired difference in the proportion of transducers having all CFUs eliminated between LLD and HLD was −1.0% (95% CI: −2.4 to −0.2%, P‐value <.001). Conclusions: Disinfection with LLD is noninferior to HLD when microorganisms from skin have contaminated the transducer. Therefore, using LLD for US transducers involved in percutaneous procedures would present no higher infection risk compared with HLD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Central venous access devices (CVADs) are commonly used in malignancies. We conducted an online, anonymous cross‐sectional survey of practice regarding CVAD management in haematology centres among clinicians in Australia and New Zealand. We identified variation in clinical practice regarding CVAD selection, insertion, management and removal. These findings highlight research gaps in CVAD care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The optimal approach for peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) insertion in adult hospitalised patients with difficult intravenous access (DIVA) is unknown. The present study aimed to critically appraise the quality of (i) assessment instruments and (ii) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) or escalation pathways for identifying and managing patients with DIVA. Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EBSCO MEDLINE, EMBASE (OVID) and EBSCO CINAHL databases were searched on 22 March 2021. Studies describing a DIVA assessment measure, CPG or escalation pathway for PIVC insertion in adults (≥18 years of age) were included. Data were extracted using a standardised data extraction form including study design, type of resource and reported clinical outcomes. Quality of DIVA assessment instruments were reviewed using the COnsensus‐based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments checklist. Methodological quality of CPGs and escalation pathways was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation‐II (AGREE‐II) instrument. Overall, 24 DIVA resources comprising 16 DIVA assessment instruments and nine CPGs or escalation pathways (including one combined assessment instrument and escalation pathway) were identified. Instruments commonly focused on vein visibility and palpability as indicators of DIVA. CPGs and escalation pathways unanimously recommended use of vessel visualisation technology for patients with or suspected of DIVA. Methodological quality of the resources was mixed. Consensus and standardisation of resources to identify DIVA and recommendations for managing patients with DIVA is limited. Adopting consistent, evidence‐based CPGs, escalation pathways or DIVA assessment instruments may significantly improve clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Ultrasound‐guided peripheral intravenous cannulation (USGPIVC) benefits patients with difficult intravenous access (DIVA) through visualising otherwise non‐visible and non‐palpable veins. Supervised live‐case training is an important component of learning this skill, but supervisor availability can present a barrier limiting or delaying staff completing their training. Aims: The aim of this study was to determine the first‐attempt success rate of newly trained USGPIVC inserters using remote supervision and timely written feedback based on app‐based screen recordings taken during insertion. Secondary aims were overall procedural success, and inserter and patient experiences. Methods: This study is an observational cohort study carried out between October and December 2021. Fourteen newly trained junior medical officers (JMOs) were eligible to utilise USGPIVC on a minimum of five consenting patients while simultaneously recording the ultrasound screen during insertion to capture their technique. Feedback was generated following expert review of these recordings against a standardised feedback tool. Results: Average first‐attempt success was 71% (n = 72) in the 102 patients recruited. The average time for JMOs to receive feedback was 30 h, and 13 JMOs (93%) felt well supported and completed the remote training pathway. The majority of patients were female (n = 59; 58%), were aged 41–80 years (n = 75; 74%) and had ≥2 risk factors for DIVA (n = 57; 56%). Conclusions: First‐attempt success rates were similar when comparing remote supervision used in this study to direct supervision used by other studies.This finding supports incorporating remote supervision into training guidelines for USGPIVC as an alternative method of supervision, particularly when supervisor availability is limited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Insertion of a 16 or 18 gauge peripheral intravenous catheter is a potentially painful intervention but one frequently experienced by pregnant women when admitted to hospital. Although the rationale for this practice is 'in case of an emergency bleed', evidence for using large‐bore catheters in this population is absent. Aims: (i) To identify the proportion of 18 gauge or larger peripheral catheters inserted into maternity patients; and (ii) to investigate the proportion of women who require blood products during their perinatal period. Materials and Methods: Data from a sub‐set of maternity patients who were included in a study of risk factors for peripheral intravenous access failure were analysed using descriptive statistics. Results: One hundred and fourteen catheters were inserted in 95 women. Of the 95 first‐inserted catheters, 84 (88.4%) were 16 or 18 gauge and 69 (82.1%) of these were placed in the hand or wrist. Four women (4%) received blood products, all were for non‐urgent transfusions. Conclusion: Postpartum haemorrhage requiring a blood transfusion remains a relatively rare event. Comprehensive risk assessment should be undertaken before inserting large‐bore catheters in perinatal women. Small veins in the hand and wrist should not be used for large bore catheters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Aims Methods Results Conclusion Mechanical force skin injuries are common for critical care patients, especially neonates. Currently, identification and severity assessments of injuries are dependent on clinical experience and/or utilization of severity tools. Compared with adults, neonates sustain skin injuries in different anatomical locations and have decreased layers of healthy tissue (from 0.9 to 1.2 mm) creating questions around direct application of adult injury severity scales reliant on visual assessment.The aim of this scoping review (ScR) was to investigate severity scales used to report hospital acquired skin injuries for neonates.This study utilized the 2015 Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses for Scoping Reviews extension. PubMed, CINAHL, COCHRANE Central, Scopus, and the reference lists of included studies were searched for studies published between 2001 and 2023, that included severity scales use within neonatal population. Two authors independently identified studies for full review, data extraction, and quality assessment.A systematic database search returned 1163 records. After full test review of 109 studies, 35 studies were included. A majority of studies included were cohort or action research and conducted in the United States of America. Most studies (57%, n = 20) reported skin injuries acquired throughout the body, 14 (40%) of the studies reported the nasal area alone and one study reported no anatomical location. A total of nine severity scales or combination of scales were utilized within studies (n = 31) and four studies did not report a scale. Various versions of scales from the National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (n = 16), European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (n = 8) or Neonatal Skin Condition Score (n = 4) were reported, compared with locally developed classifications/scales (n = 4). Scales were predominantly of ordinal grouping (74%, n = 26) or categorical assessment (14%, n = 5). Only one scale from 2004 was validated for neonates.Neonatal skin injuries will continue to be reported subjectively until severity scales are consistently applied or other measurements are identified to support assessment. Additionally, without skin injury assessment uniformity, critical examination of effectiveness of skin care treatment practices will have subjective comparison. This review suggests there is a need for consistent skin assessment and severity scales that are valid for the neonatal population and their unique skin considerations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale, aims and objectives Many peripheral intravenous catheter ( PIVC) infusion phlebitis scales and definitions are used internationally, although no existing scale has demonstrated comprehensive reliability and validity. We examined inter-rater agreement between registered nurses on signs, symptoms and scales commonly used in phlebitis assessment. Methods Seven PIVC-associated phlebitis signs/symptoms (pain, tenderness, swelling, erythema, palpable venous cord, purulent discharge and warmth) were observed daily by two raters (a research nurse and registered nurse). These data were modelled into phlebitis scores using 10 different tools. Proportions of agreement (e.g. positive, negative), observed and expected agreements, Cohen's kappa, the maximum achievable kappa, prevalence- and bias-adjusted kappa were calculated. Results Two hundred ten patients were recruited across three hospitals, with 247 sets of paired observations undertaken. The second rater was blinded to the first's findings. The Catney and Rittenberg scales were the most sensitive (phlebitis in >20% of observations), whereas the Curran, Lanbeck and Rickard scales were the most restrictive (≤2% phlebitis). Only tenderness and the Catney (one of pain, tenderness, erythema or palpable cord) and Rittenberg scales (one of erythema, swelling, tenderness or pain) had acceptable (more than two-thirds, 66.7%) levels of inter-rater agreement. Conclusions Inter-rater agreement for phlebitis assessment signs/symptoms and scales is low. This likely contributes to the high degree of variability in phlebitis rates in literature. We recommend further research into assessment of infrequent signs/symptoms and the Catney or Rittenberg scales. New approaches to evaluating vein irritation that are valid, reliable and based on their ability to predict complications need exploration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]