Search

Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are ubiquitous in acute care settings however failure rates are unacceptably high, with around half failing before prescribed treatment is complete. The most effective dressing and securement option to prolong PIVC longevity is unclear.To determine feasibility of conducting a definitive randomized controlled trial (RCT) investigating evidence-based securement bundles (medical adhesive tapes and supplementary securement products) to reduce PIVC failure.In this pilot non-masked 3-group RCT, adults requiring a PIVC for24 hrs were randomized to Standard care (bordered polyurethane dressing plus non-sterile tape over extension tubing), Securement Bundle 1 (two sterile tape strips over PIVC hub plus Standard care) or Securement Bundle 2 (Bundle 1 plus tubular bandage) with allocation concealed until study entry.laboratory-confirmed positive blood culture, current/high-risk of skin tear, or study product allergy.feasibility (eligibility, recruitment, retention, protocol fidelity, participant/staff satisfaction).PIVC failure, PIVC dwell time, adverse skin events, PIVC colonization and cost.Of 109 randomized participants, 104 were included in final analyses. Feasibility outcomes were met, except eligibility criterion (79%). Absolute PIVC failure was 38.2% (13/34) for Bundle 2, 25% (9/36) for Bundle 1 and 23.5% (8/34) for Standard care. Incidence rate ratio for PIVC failure/1000 catheter days, compared to Standard care, was 1.1 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.4-2.7) and 2.1 (95% CI 0.9-5.1) for Bundles 1 and 2, respectively.A large RCT testing securement bundles is feasible, with adjustment to screening processes. Innovative dressing and securement solutions are needed to reduce unacceptable PIVC failure rates. Trial registration ACTRN12619000026123.

Needleless connectors (NCs) are essential devices designed to provide safe, needle-free connection between venous access devices, syringes and infusions. There is a variety of designs, and associated decontamination products and practices; the resulting confusion can cause detrimental patient outcomes. This study aimed to explore nurses' attitudes, techniques, and practices around the use and decontamination of NCs in clinical practice.Qualitative inquiry was conducted with seven focus groups of 4-6 participants each in the cancer and surgical units of a large tertiary hospital in Australia between January and March 2019. Participants comprised nurses who had taken part in a recent clinical trial of NC decontamination. Focus group sessions were recorded, transcribed and synthesised using content analysis.Seven focus groups were conducted (total, N = 30 participants), lasting 16-20 min. Six major themes were identified surrounding needleless connector use and decontamination: 'safety and utility'; 'terminology and technological understanding'; 'clinical practice determinants'; 'decontamination procedures and influencers'; 'education and culture'; and 'research and innovation'.The participants articulated positive attitudes towards needleless connector use for needle-stick and infection prevention, however rationales for care and maintenance practices demonstrated limited understanding of guidelines (e.g., disinfection time) and specific NC function (e.g., positive, negative pressure). The findings indicated the need for targeted, standardised needleless connector education, to enhance staff confidence, improve consistency of care and ensure patient safety.

Pediatric extravasation injuries are significant healthcare-associated injuries, with sometimes significant sequelae. Evidence-based guidance on management is necessary to prevent permanent injury.A systematic review of the literature, including aggregated case series, investigating extravasation injury management of hospitalized pediatric patients.PubMed, Cummulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Excerpta Medica database (EMBASE) were searched on December 13, 2021.Primary research investigating extravasation injury management of hospitalized pediatric patients (to 18 years), published from 2010 onwards and in English, independently screened by two authors, with arbitration from a third author.Data regarding the study, patient (age, primary diagnosis), extravasation (site, presentation, outcome), and treatment (first aid, wound management) were extracted by two authors, with arbitration from a third author.From an initial 1769 articles, 27 studies were included with extractable case data reported in 18 studies, resulting in 33 cases. No clinical trials were identified, instead, studies were primarily case studies (52%) of neonates (67%), with varied extravasation symptoms. Studies had good selection and ascertainment, but few met the causality and reporting requirements for quality assessments. Signs and symptoms varied, with scarring (45%) and necrosis (30%) commonly described. Diverse treatments were categorized into first aid, medical, surgical, and dressings.Despite infiltration and extravasation injuries being common within pediatric healthcare, management interventions are under-researched, with low-quality studies and no consensus on treatments or outcomes.

Aims and objectives: Explore the parent and child/young person experience of difficult venous access and identify ideas and preferences for changes to clinical practice. Background: Peripheral intravenous catheter insertion is one of the most common invasive procedures in hospitalised paediatric patients. Multiple insertion attempts in paediatric patients are common and associated with pain and distress. Little research has explored the parent and child/young person experience of difficult venous access nor sought to identify their suggestions to improve clinical practice. Design: Qualitative description. Methods: A purposive sampling approach was used to identify children and young people with experience of difficult venous access and their parents. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, with sample size based on data saturation. Transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. Results: There were 12 participants, seven parents and five children/young people (five parent/child dyads and two individual parents). Analysis of the data revealed three main themes: (1) Distress—before, during and after (2) Families navigating the system: the challenging journey from general clinician to specialist and (3) Difficult venous access impacts both treatment and life outside the hospital A pre-determined theme, (4) Recommendations for good clinical practice is also described. Conclusions: Multiple attempts to insert a peripheral intravenous catheter are a source of substantial distress for children/young people, leading to treatment avoidance. Effective interpersonal skills, providing choice and avoiding frightening language are important to minimise distress. Clinicians without specialist training should assess each child's venous access experience and consider immediate referral to a specialist if they have a history of difficult venous access. Cultural change is required so clinicians and healthcare services recognise that repeated cannulation may be a source of psychological distress for children/young people. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Highlights Abstract Purpose: This study aimed to gain further knowledge about the comparative effectiveness of chemical disinfectants in reducing the bacterial load of NCs inoculated with S. aureus. Methods: Disinfection of needleless connectors was undertaken in vitro against Staphylococcus aureus comparing 70% isopropyl alcohol (IPA), 70% ethanol, 0.5% and 2% chlorhexidine in 70% IPA applied with gauze, and 70% IPA single-use cap (Site-Scrub®). Results: All disinfectants reduced the bacterial load (P < 0.001), especially the chlorhexidine solutions. Mechanical friction should follow guidelines. Conclusion: This study found that all tested disinfectants effectively reduced the bacterial load and more clinical studies must be developed with a focus on the Brazilian clinical practice of needleless connector disinfection.

The use of the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method is an innovative way to provide practical, evidence based clinical guidance to infection preventionist (IP) in the absence of clinical trial data. This brief primer aims to introduce the IP to the methodology, including a short case study demonstrating the utilization of the method in the arena of infection prevention and management.

Compare effectiveness of chemical disinfectants in reducingThis study aimed to gain further knowledge about the comparative effectiveness of chemical disinfectants in reducing the bacterial load of NCs inoculated withDisinfection of needleless connectors was undertaken in vitro against S. aureus comparing 70% isopropyl alcohol (IPA), 70% ethanol, 0.5% and 2% chlorhexidine in 70% IPA applied with gauze, and 70% IPA single-use cap (Site-Scrub®).All disinfectants reduced the bacterial load (This study found that all tested disinfectants effectively reduced the bacterial load and more clinical studies must be developed with a focus on the Brazilian clinical practice of needleless connector disinfection.

BACKGROUND: Family-centered care (FCC) has been successfully incorporated into daily practice in many neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) worldwide. However, the implementation of FCC in lower-resourced settings, such as Thailand, can be challenging and needs to be further explored. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To identify parents' and interdisciplinary professionals' perceptions of FCC and to describe the opportunities to improve FCC in a Thai NICU. DESIGN: An exploratory qualitative approach was used. METHODS: The data were collected through face-to-face, semi-structured, individual interviews based on an interview guide. This study was conducted before the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (February 2020) in a hospital in southern Thailand. Inductive thematic analysis was used to analyse interview data. RESULTS: Participants were parents (n = 9) and interdisciplinary professionals (n = 8). The results revealed four key themes: (a) Recognizing and responding to individual families' different readiness and their rights and values, (b) working in a parent-interdisciplinary partnership to provide care, (c) lacking resources and motivation and (d) understanding of care requirements and providing help/sympathy. CONCLUSIONS: The interdisciplinary professionals accepted that FCC is necessary for clinical practice, but there are some challenges in the Thai NICUs context because of the system of health care delivery. The findings highlighted that interdisciplinary professionals often viewed parents' involvement as an obstacle to providing neonatal care. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Further research is recommended to investigate how FCC is operationalized by interdisciplinary professionals and how hospital administrators can be supported to implement the FCC approach into clinical practice in Thai NICUs.

BACKGROUND The optimal intravenous device for antibiotic administration for children with respiratory disease is uncertain. We assessed the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial comparing midline catheters with peripherally inserted central catheters. METHODS Prospective, two-arm, feasibility randomized controlled trial in an Australian tertiary, pediatric hospital. Random assignment of 110 children (

Background: Childbirth is a normal, physiological process, yet intervention is common. Arguably the most common intervention is the insertion of a peripheral intravenous catheter; however, there are few studies guiding best practice. This study aimed to describe current intravenous catheter insertion practice, explore clinician decision-making during insertion and perceptions of women. Methods: This prospective, observational cohort study recruited 101 women and clinicians from two Australian regional hospitals. Data collection incorporated non-participant observation, brief interview and chart review. Variables measured included pain score, insertion attempts, catheter gauge and dwell time. Results: Childbearing women were, on average, aged 31 with body mass index (BMI) above 28. Women reported a mean pain score of 3.3/10 at 24 h for catheter insertion and 12% reported bruising. An 18-gauge catheter was considered more painful than a 16-gauge, and multiple attempts did not increase perceived average pain score. Association between failed first attempts and higher BMI was not established. Participant clinicians were predominantly midwives, who selected and placed 18-gauge catheters mostly in hand or wrist (66%). Decision-making about site, catheter gauge, dressing and attempts varied. Thirty-four per cent attempted two to three times, despite regular practise. Confidence to reliably insert determined catheter gauge and almost half clinician participants cited hospital policy and preferred non-dominant arm as key reasons for the location of PIVC. Conclusions: Regular use of a large-gauge catheter is counter intuitive when placed in the small veins of the hand with extension tubing. More research is needed to promote best practice around gauge selection, site and women's experience.

Transfusion of red blood cell (RBC) concentrates is a common procedure to restore blood volume and tissue oxygen delivery in patients with trauma. Although RBC warmers may prevent hypothermia, some warming or infusion equipment may lead to haemolysis and patient injury.The aim of this study was to test the effect of (i) RBC warming and (ii) administration via manual vs. pump infusion on haemolysis.This experimental ex vivo study studied haemolysis markers of RBC injury. The sample consisted of 90 RBC infusions in two simulations, randomly, 45 warmed RBC infusions and 45 nonwarmed RBC infusions, in two or three stages: before the intervention (baseline-warming, N= 45; nonwarming, N= 45), after water bath warming at 42 °C (warmed, N= 45), and then after the warmed or nonwarmed RBCs were infused by manual or pump infusion at a rate of 100 mL/h (infusion-warming, N= 45; nonwarming, N= 45).Warmed RBCs showed significantly lower total haemoglobin (Hb) and haematocrit levels and increase in free Hb levels, haemolysis levels, and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) activity (all p0.05) than baseline RBCs. Pump infusion RBCs were associated with reduced total Hb and increased free Hb, haemolysis, and potassium (K) levels (all p0.05) compared with warmed RBCs. In contrast, manual infusion of warmed RBCs resulted in significantly reduced total Hb levels and increased LDH activity (both0.05). After infusion, total Hb, free Hb, haematocrit, haemolysis, and LDH values were significantly different for warmed vs. nonwarmed RBCs (p0.05).Haemolysis biomarkers increase with RBC warming and infusion, especially when using infusion pumps. Critically ill patients should be carefully monitored for possible complications during and after RBC infusion.

Objective:To examine the effectiveness of antimicrobial and antithrombogenic materials incorporated into peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) to prevent bloodstream infection, thrombosis, and catheter occlusion.Methods:Prospective cohort study involving 52 hospitals participating in the Michigan Hospital Medicine Safety Consortium. Sample included adult hospitalized medical patients who received a PICC between January 2013 and October 2019. Coated and impregnated catheters were identified by name, brand, and device marketing or regulatory materials. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models with robust sandwich standard error estimates accounting for the clustered nature of data were used to identify factors associated with PICC complications in coated versus noncoated devices across general care, intensive care unit (ICU), and oncology patients. Results were expressed as hazard ratios (HRs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs).Results:Of 42,562 patients with a PICC, 39,806 (93.5%) were plain polyurethane, 2,263 (5.3%) incorporated antimicrobial materials, and 921 (2.2%) incorporated antithrombogenic materials. Most were inserted in general ward settings (n = 28,111, 66.0%), with 12, 078 (28.4%) and 1,407 (3.3%) placed in ICU and oncological settings, respectively. Within the entire cohort, 540 (1.3%) developed thrombosis, 745 (1.8%) developed bloodstream infection, and 4,090 (9.6%) developed catheter occlusion. Adjusting for known risk factors, antimicrobial PICCs were not associated with infection reduction (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.82–1.64), and antithrombogenic PICCs were not associated with reduction in thrombosis and occlusion (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.92–1.44). Results were consistent across populations and care settings.Conclusions:Antimicrobial and antithrombogenic PICCs were not associated with a reduction in major catheter complications. Guidance aimed at informing use of these devices, balancing benefits against cost, appear necessary.

Background Critically ill patients in an intensive care setting often require arterial catheters for blood pressure monitoring and arterial blood collection. Arterial catheter failure, which manifests in both mechanical and infective forms, remains common. Dressing and securement inadequacies may impact this failure; however, the best method for dressing and securing arterial catheters is yet to be determined. Objectives The objective of this study was to establish the feasibility of a definitive randomised controlled trial comparing methods for dressing and securing arterial catheters and to prevent device failure in an adult intensive care setting. Methods A pilot, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial was conducted between April 2017 and June 2018. Patients receiving treatment in two adult intensive care units (Queensland, Australia) were eligible for inclusion and were allocated to receive either (i) an integrated securement dressing or (ii) a simple polyurethane dressing (with gauze/foam), applied to their newly inserted arterial catheters. Main outcome measures Primary outcomes were (i) feasibility (defined by pre-established criteria: patient eligibility, consent, protocol adherence, retention, and staff acceptability) and (ii) all-cause arterial catheter failure (a composite of local and bloodstream infection, occlusion, dislodgement, infiltration/extravasation, arterial inflammation, thrombosis, and/or inaccurate trace). Secondary outcomes included: failure type, dwell time, dressing adhesion, adverse event profiles, and staff acceptability. Results In total, 109 patients were studied (n = 53 integrated securement dressing; n = 56 simple polyurethane). The feasibility criterion was met by most patients (including rates of consent [86%], protocol adherence [93%], and retention [100%]); however, the criteria for patient eligibility were not met (73%). All-cause device failure did not differ significantly between the integrated securement device group (n = 12/53, 23%) and the simple polyurethane group (n = 6/56, 11%) (hazard ratio = 2.39, 95% confidence interval = 0.89–6.37, p = 0.083). Conclusions Findings indicate a larger study is feasible, with minor alterations to recruitment methods required. Arterial catheter failure remains unacceptably common; further research to determine optimal dressing/securement practices is urgently needed.

IntroductionPeripheral 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 analysisIn 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 commencementEthical 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.

Introduction Central venous access devices (CVADs) are a vital medical device for intensive care (ICU) patients; however, complications and failure are common, yet potentially prevented through effective dressings and securement. Objectives/aims The objective of this study was to test the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing standard care with three dressing and securement products to prevent CVAD failure. Secondary aims included comparing dressing and securement products on CVAD failure, microbial colonisation, and intervention costs. Methods A single-centre pilot RCT of ICU adult patients requiring CVADs for >24 h were randomised to four groups: (i) sutures plus chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) dressing (standard care); (ii) standard care plus tissue adhesive (TA); (iii) two sutureless stabilisation devices (SSD) plus CHG dressing; (iv) sutures, CHG disc plus integrated securement dressing (ISD). Descriptive statistics assessed feasibility. Incidence rates (IRs) of CVAD failure were reported, with group differences compared using the Fisher exact and log-rank tests. Cox regression explored univariable risks for failure. A substudy examined bacterial colonisation of catheter tips, dressings, and skin. Cost estimates of the intervention were compared. Results A total of 121 participants were randomised. Study feasibility was established with no withdrawal and moderate staff acceptability; however, recruitment was low at 12%. Overall CVAD failure was seen in 14 of 114 (12%) CVADs (19 per 1000 catheter-days); highest in the SSD group (IR: 27.3 per 1000 catheter-days [95% confidence interval {CI}: 11.4–65.6]), followed by the standard care group (IR: 22.3 per 1000 catheter-days [95% CI: 8.38–59.5]) and TA group (IR: 20.6 per 1000 catheter-days [95% CI: 6.66–64.0]), and lowest in the ISD group (IR: 8.8 per 1000 catheter-days [95% CI: 2.19–35.0]). The majority of complications (11/14, 79%) were suspected central line-associated bloodstream infection (CLABSI), of which only one was laboratory confirmed (standard care group). The cost per patient was lowest in the standard care group by an average difference of AUD $14. Conclusion(s) A large multisite RCT examining forms of securement and dressing is feasible. ISD is the highest priority to test further as it had the lowest failure rate. Trial registration ACTRN12615000667516 Protocol https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx? id = 368765

Aim: Central venous access devices (CVADs) are vital medical devices to support the treatment of paediatric cancer; however, device occlusion is common, which disrupts treatment. This study aimed to improve the identification and management of CVAD occlusions in children with cancer, as well as to identify the demographic, clinical and device characteristics associated with increased risk for CVAD occlusion. Methods: A pre–post-implementation study was conducted at a metropolitan paediatric oncology facility in Australia, using the Theoretical Domains Framework. Patients with a CVAD for anti-cancer therapy were prospectively followed for occlusive events pre- and post- the implementation of clinical resources to support the identification and management of CVAD occlusive events. CVAD occlusion and management data were collected and compared pre- and post-implementation. Risk factors for CVAD occlusion were described by mixed-effects Poisson regression and incident rate ratios (IRR). Results: A total of 133 CVADs were inserted into 131 patients for a total of 6784 catheter days. The incidence of CVAD-related occlusion pre-implementation was 59.7 (95% confidence interval (CI) 51.4–69.0, per 1000 catheter days); compared to 31.6 (95% CI 26.4–37.6); P < 0.01) post-implementation of clinical resources. In multivariate models, other than post-implementation phases (IRR 0.51 (95% CI 0.32–0.81)), only neutropaenia significantly increased the risk of CVAD occlusion (IRR 2.14 (95% CI 1.15–3.97)). Conclusion: CVAD occlusions in paediatric oncology are common. The development and implementation of CVAD occlusion resources to guide the identification and management of occlusive episodes led to a significant decrease in occlusive events.

Introduction: Peripheral arterial catheters (PAC) are used for haemodynamic monitoring and blood sampling in paediatric critical care. Limited data are available regarding PAC insertion and management practices, and how they relate to device function and failure. This information is necessary to inform future interventional research. Objectives: The primary objective of this study was to describe PAC insertion and management practices, and associated complications. Secondary objectives were to determine patient and clinical characteristics associated with risk of PAC successful insertion and failure. Methods: A prospective, observational study was conducted in the anaesthetic department and paediatric intensive care unit of a tertiary paediatric facility. Data were collected on PAC insertion, PAC management and PAC removal. Standard incidence and prevalence were calculated per 1,000 device days. Risk factors for multiple insertions and PAC failure were identified using Cox regression. Results: A total of 100 catheters in 89 children were examined capturing 472 device days. PACs were primarily inserted for blood sampling (78%) in the radial artery (78%) using ultrasound guidance (67%), with 31% inserted on first attempt. Heparin saline solution was used in 82% of devices. Median catheter dwell was 50.6 hours (IQR 24.0 – 158.0), with PAC failure occurring in 19 devices (20%), at a rate of 40.2 per 1000 catheter days (95% CI 25.7 - 63.1). Arm board immobilisation (HR 2.9; 95% CI 1.02-8.02; p = 0.05), higher PIM3 score (HR 1.06; 95% CI 1.03-1.09; p < 0.01) was associated with an increased the risk of PAC failure, and non-2% chlorhexidine antisepsis was associated with a decrease in PAC failure (HR 0.32; 95% CI 0.11-0.96; p = 0.04), in univariate analysis. Conclusions: PAC insertion is challenging, and failure is common. Prospective clinical trial data is needed to identify high risk patient groups and to develop interventions which optimise practices, thereby reducing failure.

Background: Peripherally inserted central catheters are susceptible to microbial colonisation and subsequent biofilm formation, leading to central line–associated bloodstream infection, a serious peripherally inserted central catheter–related complication. Next-generation peripherally inserted central catheter biomaterials, such as hydrophobic materials (e.g. Endexo®), may reduce microbial biofilm formation or attachment, consequently reducing the potential for central line–associated bloodstream infection. Methods: Within a randomised controlled trial, culture-dependent and culture-independent methods were used to determine if the biomaterials used in traditional polyurethane peripherally inserted central catheters and hydrophobic peripherally inserted central catheters impacted microbial biofilm composition. This study also explored the impact of other clinical characteristics including central line–associated bloodstream infection, antibiotic therapy and dwell time on the microbial biofilm composition of peripherally inserted central catheters. Results: From a total of 32 patients, one peripherally inserted central catheter was determined to be colonised with Staphylococcus aureus, and on further analysis, the patient was diagnosed with central line–associated bloodstream infection. All peripherally inserted central catheters ( n = 17 polyurethane vs n = 15 hydrophobic) were populated with complex microbial communities, including peripherally inserted central catheters considered non-colonised. The two main microbial communities observed included Staphylococcus spp., dominant on the colonised peripherally inserted central catheter, and Enterococcus, dominant on non-colonised peripherally inserted central catheters. Both the peripherally inserted central catheter biomaterial design and antibiotic therapy had no significant impact on microbial communities. However, the diversity of microbial communities significantly decreased with dwell time. Conclusion: More diverse pathogens were present on the colonised peripherally inserted central catheter collected from the patient with central line–associated bloodstream infection. Microbial biofilm composition did not appear to be affected by the design of peripherally inserted central catheter biomaterials or antibiotic therapy. However, the diversity of the microbial communities appeared to decrease with dwell time.

OBJECTIVE: To critically review the evidence for the selection and insertion of pediatric vascular access devices (VADs). DATA SOURCES: Data were sourced from the US National Library of Medicine, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, the Cochrane Library databases, Embase, and international clinical trial databases. STUDY SELECTION: Clinical practice guidelines, systematic reviews, cohort designs, randomized control trials (RCTs), quasi RCTs, before-after trials, or case-control studies that reported on complications and/or risk as well as reliability of VADs in patients aged 0 to 18 years were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Articles were independently reviewed to extract and summarize details on the number of patients and catheters, population, age of participants, VAD type, study method, indication, comparators, and the frequency of VAD failure or complications. RESULTS: VAD selection and insertion decision-making in general hospitalized and some specialized patient populations were well evidenced. The use of single-lumen devices and ultrasound-guided techniques was also broadly supported. There was a lack of RCTs, and for neonates, cardiac patients, patients with difficult venous access, midline catheters, catheter-to-vein ratio, and near-infrared devices, the lack of evidence necessitated broadening the review scope. LIMITATIONS: Limitations include the lack of formal assessment of the quality of evidence and the lack of RCTs and systematic reviews. Consequently, clinical decision-making in certain pediatric populations is not guided by strong, evidence-based recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first synthesis of available evidence for the selection and insertion of VADs in pediatric patients and is important for determining the appropriateness of VADs in pediatric patients.

This study aims to synthesise and critically review the research on Family-Centred Care interventions in Neonatal Intensive Care Units and neonatal special care units across international, and thereby cross-cultural, settings. An integrative literature review approach was used, with seven databases searched. The search generated 1,741 articles, with forty-eight meeting the inclusion criteria. Physical participation and involvement of families within neonatal care was the most common intervention and was included in studies across most countries, while the concepts of bedside/medical rounds, interdisciplinary family conferences, and partnership were the interventions least reported. Although clinical, family and health service outcomes were measured across studies, they were varied and diverse. Further research on Family-Centred Care interventions and their relevance globally is needed to provide a greater understanding of Family-Centred Care within different contexts.

Highlights Abstract Background: Despite evidence to support best practice in neonatal and pediatric venipuncture delivery and procedural support, there are inconsistencies in practice. To inform future research, education, and workforce innovation, the Association for Vascular Access Pediatric Special Interest Group (PediSIG) developed and undertook a survey to describe the current vascular access practice for clinicians caring for neonatal and pediatric patients. Objective: Describe the current state of workforce models, training, and clinical practices surrounding pediatric and neonatal vascular access. Design: Cross-sectional, electronic survey using convenience sampling. Settings: International clinicians who provide vascular access (peripheral intravenous catheter insertion, venipuncture for blood sampling) for neonatal and pediatric patients. Methods: An electronic survey was developed by the PediSIG. The survey covered workforce models, clinician training and competency, pain relief, procedural support, and device securement. The electronic survey was then distributed to the PediSIG membership and shared among several neonatal/pediatric email lists. Data were analyzed descriptively, with an exploration of association between clinical outcomes, workforce, and training. Results: There were 242 responses from 5 countries showing a wide variance of practice. Workforce models showed many different team names and responsibilities along with a variance of personnel and staffing hours. Clinician training was described as 4 hours or less by 44% (n = 69) of respondents. Less than half of the responses (47%; n = 99) reported having a formal procedure to escalate a patient to an expert care and not having a set number of max attempts before escalation. Only two-thirds (n = 115) of respondents said they had a standardized protocol for pain control and procedural support, with only 13% (n = 23) and 15% (n = 27), respectively, self-reporting that they always followed the protocol. Conclusions: The respondents reported a wide variance in neonatal and pediatric vascular access procedures and the resources used to support this practice. Core standards need to be developed to help guide neonatal and pediatric clinicians and their institutions. The standards should encompass recommendations for workforce models, proper training, competency, insertion guidelines, pain control, procedural support, and access to vascular access specialists to provide the best care for every neonate and child.

To describe worldwide characteristics, performance and risk factors of peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs), in pediatrics.A secondary, subgroup analysis of pediatric (18 years) data was undertaken, using a global, cross-sectional study of PIVCs. Practice characteristics included: demographic, diagnostic, utility, management, performance and resources. Multivariate regression identified complication risks factors.Data from 4206 children in 278 hospitals across 47 countries. Most PIVCs (outside of Australia, New Zealand) were inserted by nurses (71%; n = 2950), with dedicated teams only common in North America (23.2%; n = 85). Large gauges (≤18G) were mostly used in South America, Europe and Africa. Regions predominantly placed 24G (49%; n = 2060) except in Australia and New Zealand, who more commonly placed 22G (38.7%; n = 192). The most common placement was the hand (51%; n = 2143), however North America, Australia and New Zealand frequently utilised the antecubital fossa (24.5%, n = 90; 21.4%; n = 106). Polyurethane dressings were most used (67.1%; 2822), and many were not clean, dry and intact (17.1%; n = 715). Over 8% of PIVCs were idle, with the highest rates in North America (21.2%; n = 78). PIVC local complication risk factors included:2 years age (odds ratio [OR] 1.58; 1.2-2.1); ambulance/emergency insertion (OR 1.65; 1.2-2.3); upper arm/antecubital placement (OR 1.44; 1.1-2.0); poor dressing integrity (OR 5.4; 4.2-6.9); and 24-72 h dwell (OR 1.9; 1.3-2.6).There is global inconsistency in pediatric PIVC practice, which may be causing harm.Improvements in pediatric PIVC placement, dressings, and gauge selection are needed.

Family-centred care (FCC) is an approach to promote family and health care provider partnership. This has been incorporated into neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) worldwide. However, FCC in low resource health settings, such as Thailand, is challenging and further impacted by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).To evaluate FCC innovations to improve respect, collaboration and support in a Thai NICU.A quasi-experimental study was conducted in an NICU in southern Thailand. Pre-implementation was prior to COVID-19, and parental and staff perceptions of FCC were measured via Perceptions of Family Centred Care-Parent (PFCC-P) and -Staff (PFCC-S) survey. The FCC innovations were developed by stakeholders based on the COVID-19 restrictions, pre-survey results, parents' and clinicians' interviews and integrative review, then implemented via a flowchart. Post-implementation evaluation was via repeated surveys. Comparisons were made pre-and post-implementation, with Mann-Whitney U-test statistics for parents and Wilcoxon's Rank Sum for staff.A total of 185 (85 pre; 100 post) parents and 20 (pre and post; paired group) health care professionals participated. Because of COVID-19, many planned interventions were unfeasible, however, other innovations achieved (e.g., structured telephone updates, information booklet revision). There was an increase in parents' perception of respect ([median] 2.50-3.50), collaboration (2.33-3.33) and support (2.60-3.60) domains and overall (2.50-3.43; p .001; 95% CI: 2.93-3.11). Interdisciplinary professionals' perception of FCC did not significantly change pre-and post-implementation/COVID-19 pandemic for respect (3.00-2.92), collaboration (3.22-3.33), support (3.20-3.20) and overall (3.15-3.20; 95% CI: 3.10-3.25).Despite the challenges of COVID-19 restricting NICU access, the provision of FCC was maintained and even improved.Further research is necessary to develop FCC practice innovations associated with communication, across diverse health care systems and resources.

Central venous access devices (CVADs) are integral to cancer care provision. Despite the high prevalence of CVAD complications in children with cancer, preventative strategies are understudied.The aim of this study was to assess study feasibility, occlusive events, thrombolytic use, adverse events, and direct costs of catheter lock solutions.A single-center, parallel-group, pilot randomized controlled trial was undertaken at a tertiary-referral pediatric hospital in Australia. Children 18 years or younger with an oncological or malignant hematological condition and a CVAD were eligible. Participants were 1:1 randomized to (1) normal or (2) heparinized (10-100 U/mL; CVAD-type dependent) saline lock solutions.Of 217 children assessed for eligibility, 61 were recruited and randomized to normal (n = 30; 3850 CVAD days) or heparinized (n = 31; 4036 CVAD days) saline. Eligibility (52%) and recruitment (54%) feasibility targets were not met. Protocol adherence was high (95% assessments), with no attrition. Parent/clinician satisfaction of interventions was high (median, 10/10 clinicians/parents). Complete CVAD occlusion occurred in heparin only (n = 2, 6.7% CVADs; incidence rate [IR], 0.49/1000 CVAD days [0.06-1.78]). Central venous access device partial occlusion was detected in 23.3% of CVADs in heparin (n = 7; IR, 2.73/1000 CVAD days [1.36-4.87]) and 13.8% of CVADs in normal saline (n = 4; IR, 2.59/1000 CVAD days [1.24-4.77]). Thrombolytic agents were used in 16.7% heparin (5 CVADs) and 3.5% normal saline (1 CVAD). Adverse events did not differ between groups.Multisite randomized controlled trials examining CVAD locks are safe, but strategies and resources to increase recruitment and eligibility are required.Both routine CVAD lock solutions seem safe but may not prevent all forms of CVAD-associated harm.

BACKGROUND: Substantial evidence indicates that patient outcomes are more favourable in hospitals with better nurse staffing. One policy designed to achieve better staffing is minimum nurse-to-patient ratio mandates, but such policies have rarely been implemented or evaluated. In 2016, Queensland (Australia) implemented minimum nurse-to-patient ratios in selected hospitals. We aimed to assess the effects of this policy on staffing levels and patient outcomes and whether both were associated. METHODS: For this prospective panel study, we compared Queensland hospitals subject to the ratio policy (27 intervention hospitals) and those that discharged similar patients but were not subject to ratios (28 comparison hospitals) at two timepoints: before implementation of ratios (baseline) and 2 years after implementation (post-implementation). We used standardised Queensland Hospital Admitted Patient Data, linked with death records, to obtain data on patient characteristics and outcomes (30-day mortality, 7-day readmissions, and length of stay [LOS]) for medical-surgical patients and survey data from 17 010 medical-surgical nurses in the study hospitals before and after policy implementation. Survey data from nurses were used to measure nurse staffing and, after linking with standardised patient data, to estimate the differential change in outcomes between patients in intervention and comparison hospitals, and determine whether nurse staffing changes were related to it. FINDINGS: We included 231 902 patients (142 986 in intervention hospitals and 88 916 in comparison hospitals) assessed at baseline (2016) and 257 253 patients (160 167 in intervention hospitals and 97 086 in comparison hospitals) assessed in the post-implementation period (2018). After implementation, mortality rates were not significantly higher than at baseline in comparison hospitals (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1·07, 95% CI 0·97–1·17, p=0·18), but were significantly lower than at baseline in intervention hospitals (0·89, 0·84–0·95, p=0·0003). From baseline to post-implementation, readmissions increased in comparison hospitals (1·06, 1·01–1·12, p=0·015), but not in intervention hospitals (1·00, 0·95–1·04, p=0·92). Although LOS decreased in both groups post-implementation, the reduction was more pronounced in intervention hospitals than in comparison hospitals (adjusted incident rate ratio [IRR] 0·95, 95% CI 0·92–0·99, p=0·010). Staffing changed in hospitals from baseline to post-implementation: of the 36 hospitals with reliable staffing measures, 30 (83%) had more than 4·5 patients per nurse at baseline, with the number decreasing to 21 (58%) post-implementation. The majority of change was at intervention hospitals, and staffing improvements by one patient per nurse produced reductions in mortality (OR 0·93, 95% CI 0·86–0·99, p=0·045), readmissions (0·93, 0·89–0·97, p

Paediatric peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) insertion using traditional landmark insertion technique can be difficult.To systematically review the evidence comparing landmark to ultrasound guidance for PIVC insertion in general paediatric patients.Cochrane methodology to systematically search for randomised controlled trials comparing landmark to ultrasound-guided PIVC insertion.Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, US National Library of Medicine, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, Embase.English-language, paediatric trials published after 2000, reporting first-attempt insertion success, overall PIVC insertion success, and/or time to insert were included. Central venous, non-venous and trials including only difficult intravenous access were excluded. Data were independently extracted and critiqued for quality using GRADE by three authors, and analysed using random effects, with results expressed as risk ratios (RR), mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Registration (CRD42020175314).Of 70 titles identified, 5 studies (995 patients; 949 PIVCs) were included. There was no evidence of an effect of ultrasound guidance, compared to landmark, for first-attempt insertion success (RR 1.27; 95% CI 0.90-1.78; ISmall sample sizes, inconsistent outcomes and definitions in primary studies precluded definitive conclusions.Large clinical trials are needed to explore the effectiveness of ultrasound guidance for PIVC insertion in paediatrics. Specifically, children with difficult intravenous access might benefit most from this technology.

BackgroundData regarding vascular access device use and outcomes are limited. In part, this gap reflects the absence of guidance on what variables should be collected to assess patient outcomes. We sought to derive international consensus on a vascular access minimum dataset.MethodsA modified Delphi study with three rounds (two electronic surveys and a face-to-face consensus panel) was conducted involving international vascular access specialists. In Rounds 1 and 2, electronic surveys were distributed to healthcare professionals specialising in vascular access. Survey respondents were asked to rate the importance of variables, feasibility of data collection and acceptability of items, definitions and response options. In Round 3, a purposive expert panel met to review Round 1 and 2 ratings and reach consensus (defined as ≥70% agreement) on the final items to be included in a minimum dataset for vascular access devices.ResultsA total of 64 of 225 interdisciplinary healthcare professionals from 11 countries responded to Round 1 and 2 surveys (response rate of 34% and 29%, respectively). From the original 52 items, 50 items across five domains emerged from the Delphi procedure.Items related to demographic and clinical characteristics (n=5; eg, age), device characteristics (n=5; eg, device type), insertion (n=16; eg, indication), management (n=9; eg, dressing and securement), and complication and removal (n=15, eg, occlusion) were identified as requirements for a minimum dataset to track and evaluate vascular access device use and outcomes.ConclusionWe developed and internally validated a minimum dataset for vascular access device research. This study generated new knowledge to enable healthcare systems to collect relevant, useful and meaningful vascular access data. Use of this standardised approach can help benchmark clinical practice and target improvements worldwide.

Objective To develop and validate a difficult intravenous access risk assessment and escalation pathway, to increase first time intravenous insertion success in paediatrics. Methods Mixed methods underpinned by literature and co-production principles. Iterative development of the instrument was informed through semi-structured interviews and stakeholder workshops. The instrument includes a risk assessment, inserter skill self-assessment, and escalation pathways. Reproducibility, reliability, and acceptability were evaluated in a prospective cohort study at a quaternary paediatric hospital in Australia. Results Interview data (three parents, nine clinicians) uncovered two themes: i) Recognition of children with DIVA and subsequent escalation is ad hoc and problematic; and ii) Resources and training impact inserter confidence and ability. Three workshops were delivered at monthly intervals (February–April 2020) involving 21 stakeholders culminating in the co-production of the “DIVA Key”. The DIVA Key was evaluated between May–December 2020 in 78 children; 156 clinicians. Seventy-eight paired assessments were undertaken with substantial agreement (concordance range = 81.5 to 83.0%) between the assessors. Interrater reliability of the DIVA risk assessment was moderate (kappa = 0.71, 95% CI 0.63–0.80). The DIVA Key predicted multiple insertion attempts for red (high risk) DIVA classification (relative risk ratio 5.7, 95% CI 1.2–27.1; reference low risk). Consumer and clinician satisfaction with DIVA Key was high (median (IQR) = 10 [8–10]; 8 [8–10 respectively). Conclusion The DIVA Key is a straightforward, reliable instrument with inbuilt escalation pathway to support the identification of children with difficult intravenous access.

Peripheral venous catheters (PVCs) are used to administer antimicrobials, but many fail prior to completion of therapy. While some antimicrobials are known to increase the PVC failure rate, risk profiles for many are unclear.To synthesize data from prospective PVC studies conducted between 2013 and 2019 to determine associations between common antimicrobials and PVC failure.A secondary analysis was undertaken of seven randomized controlled trials and two prospective cohort studies from three quaternary hospitals (two adult and one paediatric) in Australia between 2013 and 2019. The primary outcome was PVC failure due to vessel injury (occlusion, infiltration or extravasation) or irritation (pain or phlebitis). Associations between antimicrobial use and PVC failure were explored using multi-variable Cox regression.In total, 5252 PVCs (4478 patients) were analysed; vessel injury and irritations occurred in 19% and 11% of all PVCs, respectively. Vessel injury was significantly associated with cefepime hydrochloride [hazard ratio (HR) 2.50; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.44-4.34], ceftazidime pentahydrate (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.11-3.31), flucloxacillin sodium (HR 1.84, 95% CI 1.45-2.33), lincomycin hydrochloride (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.10-2.52) and vancomycin hydrochloride (HR 1.73, 95% CI 1.25-2.40). Irritation was significantly associated with flucloxacillin sodium (HR 2.58, 95% CI 1.96-3.40).This study identified several antimicrobials associated with increased PVC failure, including some that were already known to be associated and some that had not been identified previously. Research is needed urgently to determine superior modes of delivery (e.g. dilution, infusion time, device type) that may prevent PVC failure.

OBJECTIVE Insertion and function of pediatric peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) present challenges. We systematically reviewed techniques and technologies to improve PIVC outcomes (first-time insertion success, overall insertion success, time to insertion, dwell time, failure, and complications). DATA SOURCES Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CONTROL), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), US National Library of Medicine, and Embase. STUDY SELECTION English-language pediatric trials published post 2010 reporting PIVC outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION Following Cochrane standards, two authors screened, extracted, and critiqued study quality (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach) data, random effects analysis, results expressed as risk ratios (RR), mean differences (MD) and 95% CIs. RESULTS Twenty-one studies (3237 children; 3098 PIVCs) were included. First-time insertion success significantly increased with ultrasound guidance (compared with landmark insertion; RR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.02-2.50). Use of ultrasound guidance (compared with landmark insertion) did not improve overall PIVC insertion success (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.94-1.28). There was no evidence of an effect of near-infrared (compared with landmark) on first-time insertion success (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.91-1.59) or number of attempts (MD, -0.65; 95% CI, -1.59 to 0.29); however, it significantly reduced PIVC insertion time (MD, -132.47; 95% CI, -166.68 to -98.26) and increased first-time insertion success in subgroup analysis of patients with difficult intravenous access (RR, 2.72; 95% CI, 1.02-7.24). LIMITATIONS Few studies per intervention, small sample sizes, and inconsistent outcome measures precluded definitive conclusions. CONCLUSIONS Ultrasound and near-infrared appear to improve pediatric PIVC insertion. High-quality studies examining the full extent of techniques and technologies are needed. Registration: CRD42020175314.

OBJECTIVES : Central venous access devices enable many treatments during critical illness; however, 25% of pediatric central venous access devices fail before completion of treatment due to infection, thrombosis, dislodgement, and occlusion. This is frequently attributed to inadequate securement and dressing of the device; however, high-quality research evaluating pediatric central venous access device securement innovation to prevent central venous access device failure is scarce. This study aimed to establish the feasibility of a definitive randomized control trial examining the effectiveness of current and new technologies to secure central venous access devices in pediatrics. DESIGN : Single-center, parallel group, superiority, pilot randomized control trial. SETTING : Anesthetic and intensive care departments of a tertiary pediatric hospital SUBJECTS :: One-hundred eighty pediatric patients with nontunneled central venous access device INTERVENTIONS :: Participants were randomized to receive central venous access device securement via standard care (bordered polyurethane dressing, with prolene sutures, chlorhexidine gluconate disc), tissue adhesive (Histoacryl, B Braun, Melsungen, Germany) in addition to standard care; or integrated dressing securement (SorbaView SHIELD [Centurion Medical Products, Franklin, MA], with prolene sutures and chlorhexidine gluconate disc). OUTCOMES : Primary: Feasibility (including effect size estimates, acceptability); central venous access device failure; central venous access device complications; secondary: individual central venous access device complications, skin damage, dressing performance, and product cost. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS : Feasibility criteria were achieved as recruitment occurred with acceptable eligibility, recruitment, missing data, and attrition rates, as well as good protocol adherence. Family members and staff-reported comparable levels of acceptability between study arms; however, tissue adhesive was reported as the most difficult to apply. Overall, 6% of central venous access devices failed, including 6% (3/54; incident rate, 13.2 per 1,000 catheter days) standard care, 2% (1/56; incident rate, 3.65 per 1,000 catheter days) integrated, and 8% (5/59; 25.0 per 1,000 catheter days) tissue adhesive. CONCLUSIONS : It is feasible to conduct an efficacy randomized control trial of the studied interventions. Further research is required to definitively identify clinical, cost-effective methods to prevent central venous access device failure by examining new dressing and securement technologies and techniques.

Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are important tools for the provision of treatment for unwell and premature neonates. This study aimed to explore current PIVC practices (i.e. insertion, product selection, complications and management priorities) within Australian and New Zealand neonatal units, to identify areas for innovation and practice change. The survey was distributed via Australian and New Zealand neonatal nursing associations, with 180 respondents (54% Australia; 46% New Zealand). Respondents reported an average of 2–3 insertion attempts were required per PIVC, with variability in cleansing agents, decontamination techniques, skin barrier films and PIVC dressing products used. The large majority of respondents reported seeing skin complications associated with PIVCs within their practice (94%). Infection prevention was the highest management priority, and skin complication prevention, the lowest priority. High quality research is necessary to inform neonatal PIVC insertion and management practices, to improve patient safety and treatment provision.

Background: Peripheral venous cannulation is considered a routine procedure, yet 50% of first attempt insertions fail, necessitating repeat insertion attempts. Identification of children with difficult intravenous access (DIVA) can help promote prompt escalation to an appropriately skilled clinician. Objective: To describe current international practice regarding the identification and management of children with DIVA, and to systematically review clinical tools and clinical pathways for children with DIVA. Methods: A cross‐sectional, international survey; followed by a systematic review and critical appraisal of clinical pathways using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research Evaluation (AGREE) II checklist. Results: A total of 148 clinicians from eight countries completed the survey. The majority were nurses (n = 92; 62%), practicing as vascular access specialists (n = 27; 18%). Twenty‐three respondents (16%) reported using a DIVA tool, of which the DIVA Score was most common (n = 5; 22%). Five clinical pathways were identified from the survey and review. Based on the AGREE II domains, pathways generally scored well for scope and purpose, and for clarity of presentation areas. Information on the rigor of development and editorial independence was infrequently detailed. Based on AGREE II findings, one pathway was recommended for clinical practice, and four were recommended for use with modification. Conclusions: Resources for the identification and escalation of children with DIVA are not standardized or consistently used. Further work is needed to streamline processes for DIVA identification and escalation to the appropriate clinician, with technology‐assisted insertion capability. This will enhance patient experiences and reduce harm from multiple insertion attempts. Clinical Relevance: Multiple failed insertion attempts come at great cost to the child, family, and healthcare service. Early identification and management of the child with DIVA can ensure prompt escalation and management, improving the patient and family experience.

To explore nurses' decision-making regarding intravenous administration set replacement for vascular access device infusions in paediatric and adult clinical settings.Intravenous administration sets are routinely replaced at regular intervals in clinical practice with the goal of preventing catheter-related bloodstream infection; however, emerging evidence is challenging traditional hang-time durations. Nurses' perceptions and contextual factors affecting decision-making for administration set replacement have not been assessed previously.Qualitative study using focus groups with contextualism methodology and inductive analysis.During November-December 2016, eight semi-structured focus groups were conducted with 38 nurses at two metropolitan hospitals in Queensland, Australia. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Two authors independently reviewed transcripts and extracted significant statements using Braun and Clarke's 7-step method of thematic analysis. The COREQ checklist provided a framework to report the study methods, context, findings, analysis and interpretation.Five key themes emerged from the analysis: (a) infection prevention, (b) physical safety, (c) patient preference, (d) clinical knowledge and beliefs, and (e) workload. Administration set replacement can be a complex task, particularly when patients have multiple infusions and incompatible medications. Nurses drew on perceptions of patient preference, as well as previous experience, knowledge of peer experts and local policies, to aid their decisions.Nurses use clinical reasoning to balance patient safety and preferences with competing workplace demands when undertaking administration set replacement. Nurses rely on previous experience, hospital and medication manufacturer policies, and peer experts to guide their practice.Nurses at times deviate from clinical guidelines in the interests of patient acuity, nurses' experience and workload. The findings of this study indicate nurses also balance considerations of patient preference and safety with these competing demands.

Background: Vascular access devices are widely used in healthcare settings worldwide. The insertion of a vascular access device creates a wound, vulnerable to irritation, injury and infection. Vascular access-associated skin complications are frequently reported in the literature, however very little evidence is available regarding the incidence and risk factors of these conditions to inform practice and technology development. Objectives: To estimate the incidence of vascular access-associated skin complications, and to identify patient, catheter and healthcare-related characteristics associated with skin complication development. Design: Secondary data analysis from 13 multi-centre randomised controlled trials and observational studies evaluating technologies and performance of vascular access devices in clinical settings between 2008 and 2017. Settings: Six hospitals (metropolitan and regional) in Queensland, Australia. Participants: The 13 studies involved paediatric and adult participants, across oncology, emergency, intensive care, and general hospital settings. A total of 7669 participants with 10,859 devices were included, involving peripheral venous (n = 9933), peripheral arterial (n = 341), and central venous access (n = 585) devices. Analysis: Standardised study data were extracted into a single database. Clinical and demographic data were descriptively reported. Cox proportional hazards regression models (stratified by peripheral vs central) were used for time-to-event, per-device analyses to examine risk factors. Univariate associations were undertaken due to complexities with missing data in both outcomes and covariates, with p < 0.01 to reduce the effect of multiple comparisons. Results: Over 12% of devices were associated with skin complication, at 46.2 per 1000 catheter days for peripheral venous and arterial devices (95% confidence interval, CI 42.1–50.7), and 22.5 per 1000 catheter days for central devices (95% CI 16.5–306). The most common skin complications were bruising (peripheral n = 134, 3.7%; central n = 33, 6.8%), and swelling due to infiltration for peripheral devices (n = 296; 2.9%), and dermatitis for central devices (n = 13; 2.2%). The significant risk factors for these complications were predominantly related to device (e.g., skin tears associated with peripheral arterial catheters [hazard ratio, HR 16.0], radial insertion [HR 18.0] basilic insertion [HR 26.0])) and patient characteristics (e.g., poor skin integrity associated with increased risk of peripheral device bruising [HR 4.12], infiltration [HR 1.98], and skin tear [HR 48.4]), rather than management approaches. Conclusions: Significant skin complications can develop during the life of peripheral and central vascular access devices, and these are associated with several modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors. Further research is needed to evaluate effectiveness technologies to prevent and treat skin complications associated with vascular access devices.

Background Our study aims to explore the experience of having a central venous access device (CVAD) from the perspective of the child and family and how movements within and outside of hospital environments influence this experience. Methods A mixed-methods study was conducted across Children’s Health Queensland (Australia), including inpatient and home-care settings. Children less than 18 years with CVADs were eligible and followed for 3 months or CVAD removal. A subgroup of primary caregivers participated in semi-structured interviews. Quantitative and qualitative measures of child and family CVAD experiences were explored. Results In total, 163 patients with 200 CVADs were recruited and followed for 6993 catheter days (3329 [48%] inpatients; 3147 [45%] outpatients; 517 [7%] home). Seventeen participants were interviewed. Experiences of having a CVAD were complex but predominantly positive primarily related to personalized CVAD care, healthcare quality, and general wellbeing. Their experience was shaped by their movements through hospital and home environments, including care variation and distress with procedures. Device selection and insertion location further influenced experience, including safety, impairments in activities of daily living, school, and recreation. Conclusions CVAD experiences were influenced by nonmodifiable (e.g., diagnosis) and modifiable factors (e.g., education; care variation). Clinical approaches and policies that account for family and child considerations should be explored. Impact Variation in decision making and management for pediatric CVADs is accepted by many clinicians, but the influence this variation has on the health experience of children and their families is less well explored. This is the first study to draw from a broad range of children requiring CVADs to determine their experience within and outside of healthcare facilities. Interdisciplinary clinicians and researchers need to work collaboratively with children and their families to provide resources and support services to ensure they have positive experiences with CVADs, no matter where they are managed, or who they are managed by.

Background Healthcare delivery is reliant on a functional central venous access device (CVAD), but the knowledge surrounding the burden of pediatric CVAD-associated harm is limited. Methods A prospective cohort study at a tertiary-referral pediatric hospital in Australia. Children Results 163 patients with 200 CVADs were recruited and followed for 6993 catheter days, with peripherally inserted central catheters most common (n = 119; 60%). CVAD failure occurred in 20% of devices (n = 30; 95% CI: 15–26), at an incidence rate (IR) of 5.72 per 1000 catheter days (95% CI: 4.09–7.78). CVAD complications were evident in 43% of all CVADs (n = 86; 95% CI: 36–50), at a rate of 12.29 per 1000 catheter days (95% CI: 9.84–15.16). CVAD failure costs were A$826 per episode, and A$165,372 per 1000 CVADs. Comparisons between current and recommended practice revealed inconsistent use of ultrasound guidance for insertion, sub-optimal tip-positioning, and appropriate device selection. Conclusions CVAD complications and failures represent substantial burdens to children and healthcare. Future efforts need to focus on the inconsistent use of best practices. Impact Current surveillance of central venous access device (CVAD) performance is likely under-estimating actual burden on pediatric patients and the healthcare system. CVAD failure due to complication was evident in 20% of CVADs. Costs associated with CVAD complications average at $2327 (AUD, 2020) per episode. Further investment in key diverse practice areas, including new CVAD types, CVAD pathology-based occlusion and dislodgment strategies, the appropriate use of device types, and tip-positioning technologies, will likely lead to extensive benefit.

IntroductionPeripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are vital for the delivery of medical therapies, but up to 30% of PICCs are associated with complications such as deep vein thrombosis or infection. The integration of antimicrobial and hydrophobic catheter materials, and pressure-activated valves, into polyurethane PICCs are innovations designed to prevent infective and/or thrombotic complications.Methods and analysisA multicentre, parallel group, superiority randomised controlled trial with two experimental arms ((1) hydrophobic PICC (with pressure-activated valve); (2) chlorhexidine gluconate-impregnated PICC (with external clamp)) and one control group ((3) conventional polyurethane PICC (with external clamp)). Recruitment of 1098 adult and paediatric patients will take place over 2 years at three tertiary-referral hospitals in Queensland, Australia. Patients are eligible for inclusion if their PICC is to be inserted for medical treatment, with a vascular size sufficient to support a 4-Fr PICC or larger, and with informed consent. The primary outcome is PICC failure, a composite of thrombotic (venous thrombosis, breakage and occlusion) and infective complications (PICC-associated bloodstream infection and local infection). Secondary outcomes include: all-cause PICC complication; thrombotic complications; infective complications; adverse events (local or systemic reaction); PICC dwell time; patient/parent satisfaction; and healthcare costs. Differences between both intervention groups and the control group will be compared using Cox proportional hazards regression. Effect estimates will be presented as HRs with corresponding 95% CI.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval from Queensland Health (HREC/QCHQ/48682) and Griffith University (Ref. No. 2019/094). Results will be published.Trial registration numberACTRN12619000022167.

Peripheral intravenous catheters are an essential medical device which are prone to complications and failure.Identify patient, provider and device risk factors associated with all-cause peripheral intravenous catheter failure as well as individual complications: phlebitis, infiltration/occlusion, and dislodgement to improve patient outcomes.Secondary analysis of twelve prospective studies performed between 2008 and 2020.Australian metropolitan and regional hospitals including one paediatric hospital.Participants were from medical, surgical, haematology, and oncology units.Multilevel mixed-effects parametric survival regression was used to identify factors associated with all-cause peripheral intravenous catheter failure, phlebitis, occlusion/infiltration, and dislodgement. We studied patient (e.g., age, gender), device (e.g., gauge), and provider (e.g., inserting clinician) variables. Stepwise regression involved clinically and p0.20 significant variables entered into the multivariable model. Results were expressed as hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI); p0.01 was considered statistically significant.Of 11,830 peripheral intravenous catheters (8,200 participants) failure occurred in 36% (n = 4,263). Occlusion/infiltration incidence was 23% (n = 2,767), phlebitis 12% (n = 1,421), and dislodgement 7% (n = 779) of catheters. Patient factors significantly associated with failure and complications were: female gender (phlebitis; (HR 1.98, 95% CI 1.72-2.27), (infiltration/occlusion; HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.33-1.58), (failure; HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.26-1.46); and each year increase in age (phlebitis; 0.99 HR, 95% CI 0.98-0.99), (failure; 0.99 HR, 95% CI 0.99-0.99). The strongest provider risk factor was intravenous antibiotics (infiltration/occlusion; HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.27-1.53), (phlebitis; HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.18-1.56), (failure; HR 1.26, 95% CI 1.17-1.36). Catheters inserted by vascular access teams were less likely to dislodge (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.42-0.67). Device risk factors most associated with all-cause failure were wrist/hand (HR 1.34, 95% CI 1.23-1.46), antecubital fossa peripheral intravenous catheters (HR 1.29, 95% CI 1.16-1.44) and 22/24 gauge (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.12-1.45) catheters.Factors identified, including the protective aspect of vascular access team insertion, and high catheter failure associated with intravenous antibiotic administration, will allow targeted updates of peripheral intravenous catheter guidelines and models of care.