Search

Background: Hospitalised patients receiving intravenous antimicrobial therapy require a reliable device through which this is delivered. Short peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are the default device for antimicrobial therapy but up to half fail before therapy completion, leading to suboptimal drug dosing, patient distress from repeated insertions, and increased healthcare costs. This study will investigate the use of long PIVCs to determine if they are more reliable at delivering antimicrobial therapy. Methods: A two-arm, parallel randomised controlled trial of hospitalised adults requiring at least 3 days of peripherally compatible intravenous antimicrobials. Participants will be randomised to a short (

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.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.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.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%).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.

Background: Integrated peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) demonstrate clinical efficacy, however, device complexity and design differences may be a potential barrier to implementation. Aims: To assess nurse acceptability of integrated PIVC systems. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was nested within a multicentre randomised controlled trial. One hundred nurses caring for patients with integrated and non-integrated PIVCs completed a 17-item survey about key differences between devices (eg function and appearance, perceived patient comfort and skin injuries). Findings: Most nurses reported the integrated PIVC wings prevented device movement (80%), achieved patient comfort in areas of flexion (78%), and no patients developed skin injuries (100%). Nurses rated the ease of accessing and overall confidence using the integrated PIVC as significantly higher than the non-integrated design (P

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.

One-third of peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) fail from inflammatory or infectious complications, causing substantial treatment interruption and replacement procedures.We aimed to compare complications between integrated PIVCs (inbuilt extension sets, wings, and flattened bases) and traditional nonintegrated PIVCs.A centrally randomized, controlled, superiority trial (with allocation concealment until study entry) was conducted in three Australian hospitals. Medical-surgical patients (one PIVC each) requiring intravenous therapy for24 h were studied.The primary outcome was device failure (composite: occlusion, infiltration, phlebitis, dislodgement, local, or bloodstream infection). Infection endpoints were assessor-masked. The secondary outcomes were: failure type, first-time insertion success, tip colonization, insertion pain, dwell time, mortality, costs, health-related quality of life, clinician, and patient satisfaction.Out of 1759 patients randomized (integrated PIVC, n = 881; nonintegrated PIVC, n = 878), 1710 (97%) received a PIVC and were in the modified intention-to-treat analysis (2269 PIVC-days integrated; 2073 PIVC-days nonintegrated). Device failure incidence was 35% (145 per 1000 device-days) nonintegrated, and 33% (124 per 1000 device-days) integrated PIVCs.Integrated PIVCs had a significantly lower failure risk (adjusted [sex, infection, setting, site, gauge] hazard ratio [HR]: 0.82 [95% confidence interval, CI: 0.69-0.96], p = .015). The per-protocol analysis was consistent (adjusted HR: 0.80 [95% CI: 0.68-0.95], p = .010). Integrated PIVCs had significantly longer dwell (top quartile ≥ 95 vs. ≥84 h). Mean per-patient costs were not statistically different.PIVC failure is common and complex. Significant risk factors include sex, infection at baseline, care setting, insertion site, catheter gauge, and catheter type. Integrated PIVCs can significantly reduce the burden of PIVC failure on patients and the health system.

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.

Background: Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are essential for successful administration of intravenous treatments. However, insertion failure and PIVC complications are common and negatively impact patients’ health-outcomes and experiences. We aimed to assess whether generic (established) quality of life and experience measures were suitable for use among patients with PIVCs. Methods: A secondary analysis of data collected on three existing instruments within a large randomised controlled trial, conducted at two adult tertiary hospitals in Queensland, Australia. Instruments included the EuroQual Five Dimension - Five Level (EQ5D-5L), the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy – Treatment Satisfaction – General measure (FACIT-TS-G, eight items), and the Australian Hospital Patient Experience Question Set (AHPEQS, 12 items). Responses were compared against two clinical PIVC outcomes of interest: all-cause failure and multiple insertion attempts. Classic descriptives were reported for ceiling and floor effects. Regression analyses examined validity (discrimination). Standardised response mean, and effect size (ES) assessed responsiveness (EQ5D-5L, only). Results: In total, 685 participants completed the EQ5D-5L at insertion and 526 at removal. The FACIT-TS-G was completed by 264 and the AHPEQS by 262 participants. Two FACIT-TS-G items and one AHPEQS item demonstrated ceiling effect. Instruments overall demonstrated poor discrimination, however, all-cause PIVC failure was statistically significantly associated with several individual items in the instruments (e.g., AHPEQS, ‘unexpected physical and emotional harm’). EQ5D-5L demonstrated trivial (ES Conclusions: The health-related quality of life- and experience-measures studied proved unsuitable for use among patients with PIVCs. PIVC-specific instruments are urgently needed to inform quality improvement and benchmark standards of care.

Despite pervasive need for peripheral intravenous catheters, insertion is often difficult, and approximately two thirds fail prematurely. Midline catheters are an alternative long peripheral catheter, inserted in the upper arm, ideal for patients with difficult access.The aim of this study is to test feasibility of the protocol and compare the efficacy and safety of midline catheters to peripheral intravenous catheters.A parallel-group, pilot randomized controlled trial of adult medical/surgical hospitalized patients, from a single Australian referral hospital.Participants with difficult vascular access (≤2 palpable veins) and/or anticipated ≥5 days of peripherally compatible intravenous therapy were recruited between May 2019 and March 2020. Participants were randomized to (1) peripheral intravenous catheter or (2) midline catheter. Primary feasibility outcome measured eligibility, recruitment, protocol adherence, retention and attrition. Primary clinical outcomes measured device insertion failure and post-insertion failure.In total, n = 143 participants (71 peripheral intravenous catheters and 72 midline catheters) were recruited; n = 139 were analysed. Most feasibility criteria were met. Peripheral intravenous catheters had shorter functional dwell time, with higher incidence of post-insertion failure compared to midline catheters.Midline catheters appear to be superior for patients with difficult vascular access or receiving prolonged intravenous therapy; a large, multi-centre trial to confirm findings is feasible.

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.

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.

AIM: To determine peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) characteristics, complications and risk factors among patients in cancer units. METHODS: A secondary analysis of a global, cross-sectional study (127 hospitals in 24 countries). Participants (≥18 years) admitted to cancer units were assessed once for PIVC characteristics and the presence of complications. Variables included patient demographics, device characteristics, treatment details, and device and/or site complications. PIVC characteristics were presented using qualitative descriptors; mixed-effects logistic regression models determined risk factors for PIVC complications. RESULTS: In total, 1,807 participants (1,812 PIVCs) were included; 12% (n=215) of PIVCs presented with complications. Risk factors included: insertion by doctors; insertion in ED and ambulance/other locations; poor PIVC dressing integrity; dwell time ≥49 hours; and administration of colloids/blood products and antiemetics. CONCLUSIONS: At least one in ten PIVCs in cancer units present with complications; regular PIVC assessment and improved dressing integrity is likely to reduce risk and improve outcomes.

Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are frequently used to meet patients' short-term health care needs. However, many PIVCs are not promptly removed at the completion of treatment, placing patients at risk of avoidable harm from serious complications including local and systemic infection. This study aims to report the proportion and accuracy of health care staff/students awareness of the presence of their patient's PIVC.We asked staff/students to recall the presence or absence of a PIVC in a patient under their care, as well as details of the date of insertion and PIVC location. We recorded concordance of responses with direct observations. To achieve this, face-to-face interviews were conducted with clinical staff/students at 2 adult hospitals.Overall, 90% (n = 216) of staff responses (94% of nurses, 100% of nursing students, 76% of medical staff) correctly identified the presence/absence of a PIVC. Clinicians correctly identified the PIVC location 55% (n = 71) of the time.Health care services must recognize the implications of this lack of awareness and implement and evaluate tailored quality improvement efforts to address this.

Highlights Abstract Background: Peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) are commonly placed with the assistance of fluoroscopy or medical imaging, ultrasound, electrocardiogram guidance, or all the above. Innovative ultrasound technologies continue to emerge; however, the impact upon clinical outcomes is not well understood. In this study, we aimed to compare outcomes of an existing ultrasound system with SHERLOCK 3CG™ Tip Confirmation (preintervention) to an updated SHERLOCK 3CG Diamond Tip Confirmation system, incorporating catheter-to-vein ratio measurement capabilities and an advanced magnetic-based tip navigation system (postintervention). Methods: In this prospective pre-post cohort study, we recruited adult patients requiring a new PICC. The study was conducted at a quaternary hospital in Queensland, Australia. Data were collected between May 2017 (4 months before equipment introduction) and January 2018 (4 months after equipment introduction), with a 1-month exclusion (education or learning) period in between. Patient, PICC, and device removal details were collected. The primary outcome was first-time insertion success, defined as successful PICC insertion after a single attempt (skin puncture), with the tip confirmed in an optimal location by the navigation system and a subsequent chest x-ray (as per hospital policy). Results: There were 503 participants with patient demographics and PICC characteristics balanced between the preintervention (n = 266) and postintervention (n = 237) groups. First-time insertion success was higher in the preintervention group (203/255, 80%) than the postintervention group (166/226, 73%), but this was not statistically significant (risk ratio = 0.92, 95% confidence interval = 0.83–1.02). Conclusions: There was no change in clinical outcomes with the use of next-generation ultrasound technology. These results justify future large studies and subsequent review into the efficacy of tip-confirmation systems and processes to maintain patient safety.

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.

Background Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are ubiquitous medical devices, crucial to providing essential fluids and drugs. However, post-insertion PIVC failure occurs frequently, likely due to inconsistent maintenance practice such as flushing. The aim of this implementation study was to evaluate the impact a multifaceted intervention centred on short PIVC maintenance had on patient outcomes. Methods This single-centre, incomplete, stepped wedge, cluster randomised trial with an implementation period was undertaken at a quaternary hospital in Queensland, Australia. Eligible patients were from general medical and surgical wards, aged ≥ 18 years, and requiring a PIVC for > 24 h. Wards were the unit of randomisation and allocation was concealed until the time of crossover to the implementation phase. Patients, clinicians, and researchers were not masked but infections were adjudicated by a physician masked to allocation. Practice during the control period was standard care (variable practice with manually prepared flushes of 0.9% sodium chloride). The intervention group received education reinforcing practice guidelines (including administration with manufacturer-prepared pre-filled flush syringes). The primary outcome was all-cause PIVC failure (as a composite of occlusion, infiltration, dislodgement, phlebitis, and primary bloodstream or local infection). Analysis was by intention-to-treat. Results Between July 2016 and February 2017, 619 patients from 9 clusters (wards) were enrolled (control n = 306, intervention n = 313), with 617 patients comprising the intention-to-treat population. PIVC failure was 91 (30%) in the control and 69 (22%) in the intervention group (risk difference − 8%, 95% CI − 14 to − 1, p = 0.032). Total costs were lower in the intervention group. No serious adverse events related to study intervention occurred. Conclusions This study demonstrated the effectiveness of post-insertion PIVC flushing according to recommended guidelines. Evidence-based education, surveillance and products for post-insertion PIVC management are vital to improve patient outcomes. Trial registration Trial submitted for registration on 25 January 2016. Approved and retrospectively registered on 4 August 2016. Ref: ACTRN12616001035415.

PURPOSE: To identify modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors for peripheral intravenous catheter (PIV) failure among patients requiring intravenous treatment for oncology and haematology conditions. METHODS: A single centre prospective cohort study was conducted between October 2017 and February 2019. Adult in-patients requiring a PIV for therapy were prospectively recruited from two cancer units at a tertiary hospital in Queensland, Australia. The primary outcome was a composite of complications leading to PIV failure (local- and bloodstream- infection; occlusion; infiltration/extravasation; leakage; dislodgement; and/or phlebitis). Secondary outcomes were: (i) PIV dwell-time; (ii) insertion- and (iii) failure of- a CVAD; (iv) adverse events; (v) length of hospital stay. Outcomes were investigated using Bayesian multivariable linear regression modelling, and survival analysis. RESULTS: Of 200 participants, 396 PIVs were included. PIV failure incidence was 34.9%; the most common failure type was occlusion/infiltration (n=74, 18.7%), then dislodgement (n=33, 8.3%), and phlebitis (n=30, 7.6%). While several patient and treatment risk factors were significant in univariable modelling, in the final multivariable model, only the use of non-sterile tape (external to the primary dressing) was significantly associated with decreased PIV dislodgement (Hazard Ratio 0.06, 95% Confidence Interval 0.01, 0.48; p=0.008). CONCLUSION: PIV failure rates among patients receiving treatment for cancer is high; the sequelae of which may include delayed treatment and infection. Larger studies on risk factors and interventions to prevent PIV failure in this population are needed; however, the use of secondary securements (such as non-sterile tape) to provide further securement to the primary PIV dressing is particularly important. REGISTRATION: Study methods were registered prospectively with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry on the 27(th) March 2017 (ACTRN12617000438358); https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=372191&isReview=true

Background: A vascular access registry is a key strategy proposed to improve patient safety and quality, but its impact will be shaped by the attitudes, experience and resources of end-user stakeholders. This study aimed to examine stakeholders’ perspectives and experiences regarding the feasibility and utility of a standardized platform to collect vascular access data and to identify potential barriers and facilitators of a vascular access clinical quality registry. Methods: Individual (n = 17) and group (n = 1) semi-structured interviews were conducted between October–December 2018 with directors from various healthcare disciplines and policy makers in Australian healthcare facilities. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed using inductive thematic analysis. Results: Overall, participants supported the idea of a standardized platform to capture vascular access data. Three main themes were identified: (1) data challenges (sub themes: standardized data capture, data quality and data sharing); (2) staff capability (lack of resources and feeling unsupported); and (3) logistics (resource capacity and implementation challenges). Conclusion: Stakeholder engagement and universal agreement on standardized vocabulary and data items are vital to registry development, implementation and sustainability. Continuous iterative cycles will be required to reflect upon, review and improve the processes around vascular access data collection using a standardized registry software platform.

Background Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) break the skin barrier, and preinsertion antiseptic disinfection and sterile dressings are used to reduce risk of catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI). In this study, the impact of PIVC skin site colonization on tip colonization and the development of CRBSI was investigated. Methods A total of 137 patients’ PIVC skin site swabs and paired PIVC tips were collected at catheter removal, cultured, and bacterial species and clonality were identified. Results Of 137 patients, 45 (33%) had colonized skin sites and/or PIVC tips. Of 16 patients with paired colonization of both the skin site and PIVC tips, 11 (69%) were colonized with the same bacterial species. Of these, 77% were clonally related, including 1 identical clone of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in a patient with systemic infection and the same organism identified in blood culture. Conclusions The results demonstrate that opportunistic pathogen colonization at the skin site poses a significant risk for PIVC colonization and CRBSI. Further research is needed to improve current preinsertion antiseptic disinfection of PIVC skin site and the sterile insertion procedure to potentially reduce PIVC colonization and infection risk.

Background: Whether to remove or retain vascular access devices (VADs) when they are suspected of infection is an important clinical question with no certain answer. This review aims to explore current literature related to removal versus retention of central venous catheters (CVCs) and intra-arterial lines (IALs) suspected of infection in the adult intensive care population. Methods: A narrative review of studies describing management of VADs suspected of infection in the intensive care unit (ICU) was undertaken. After a systematic search, two clinical studies were included in the review. The methodological rigour of these studies was assessed per the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Results: The two eligible studies consisted of one randomised control trial and one prospective observational study, including a total of 448 patients. Both studies scored highly on the MMAT, but only pertained to CVCs. No studies relating to other VAD types were identified. No significant differences in outcome were identified between patients whose VADs were removed or retained in the adult ICU cohort, apart from a reduction in number of CVC replacements in patients whose VAD was retained after infection was suspected. Conclusions: There is minimal evidence pertaining to removal versus retention of VADs suspected of infection in the adult ICU patient cohort, and there are limited recommendations specific to suspected infection guiding clinical practice. As a result, VADs may be unnecessarily removed. Further research assessing these important patient outcomes are urgently needed to inform clinical practice.

To synthesise evidence related to medical adhesive tapes and supplementary securement products for peripheral intravenous catheters in adults, to prevent complications and device failure.Integrative review informed by Whittemore and Knafl and reported in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 statement.The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health, EMBASE/MEDLINE and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health were searched from 2000-21 September 2020.Studies enrolling hospitalised participants16 years with peripheral intravenous catheters secured by medical adhesive tapes, or supplementary products (bandage, splint and sutureless securement device), were eligible. Quality appraisal was performed using Critical Appraisal Skills Program checklists.Nineteen studies met criteria, including 43,683 peripheral intravenous catheters. Quality appraisal identified high or unclear risk of bias in 58% of studies. Nonsterile tape was the most common intervention tested (14 studies), alone or in multiproduct combinations. Nonsterile tape directly over insertion sites was associated with increased PIVC failure and complications. Sutureless securement devices potentially reduce failure and complications. Multiproduct combinations were very common. Practice recommendations regarding other tapes and secondary securement products are challenging, due to conflicting, or lack of, evidence.Tapes and secondary securement product evidence are limited, and over half of the studies are of low methodological quality. This review found nonsterile tape was associated with increased failure and complications; multiproduct dressing and securement bundles were prevalent; and significant evidence gaps exist particularly regarding bandages and splints. The results provide nurses with evidence of medical adhesive tapes and supplementary product effectiveness for peripheral intravenous catheter securement, and future research directions to reduce unacceptably high failure and complication rates. Larger rigorously conducted randomised controlled trials are needed to add to current evidence.

Phlebitis is an important complication occurring in patients with peripheral intravascular catheters (PIVCs). The risk factors for phlebitis in the intensive care unit (ICU) was examined.A secondary analysis of a prospective multicenter cohort study was conducted, involving 23 ICUs in Japan-the AMOR-VENUS study. Consecutive patients aged ≥ 18 years admitted to the ICU with newly inserted PIVCs after ICU admission were enrolled. Characteristics of the ICU, patients, PIVCs, and the drugs administered via PIVCs were recorded. A marginal Cox regression model was used to identify the risk factors associated with phlebitis.A total of 2741 consecutive patients from 23 ICUs were reviewed for eligibility, resulting in 1359 patients and 3429 PIVCs being included in the analysis population. The median dwell time was 46.2 h (95% confidence interval [CI], 21.3-82.9). Phlebitis occurred in 9.1% (95% CI, 8.2-10.1%) of catheters (3.5 cases/100 catheter days). The multivariate analysis revealed that the only factors that increased the risk of developing phlebitis were drugs administered intravenously. This study included 26 drugs, and 4 were associated with increased phlebitis: nicardipine (HR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.29-2.66), noradrenaline (HR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.40-4.20), amiodarone (HR, 3.67; 95% CI, 1.75-7.71) and levetiracetam (HR, 5.65; 95% CI, 2.80-11.4). Alternatively, factors significantly associated with a reduced risk of phlebitis were: standardized drug administration measures in the ICU (HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.17-0.76), 30≤ BMI (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.20-0.95), catheter inserted by a doctor as nurse reference (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.32-0.94), and upper arm insertion site as forearm reference (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.32-0.85). The nitroglycerin was associated with a reduced phlebitis risk (HR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.05-0.92).Various factors are involved in the development of phlebitis caused by PIVCs in critically ill patients, including institutional, patient, catheter, and drug-induced factors, indicating the need for appropriate device selection or models of care in the ICU.UMIN-CTR, the Japanese clinical trial registry (registration number: UMIN000028019, July 1, 2017).

Background Central venous access devices (CVADs) can have high rates of failure due to dressing-related complications. CVADs placed in the internal jugular vein are at particular risk of dressing failure-related complications, including catheter-associated bloodstream infection and medical adhesive-related skin injury. Application of Mastisol liquid adhesive (MLA) may reduce CVAD dressing failure and associated complications, by reducing the frequency of dressing changes. The aim of this study is to investigate whether, in an intensive care unit (ICU) population, standard dressing care with or without the addition of MLA, improves internal jugular CVAD dressing adherence. Methods This two-arm, parallel group randomised controlled trial will be conducted in three Australian ICUs. A total of 160 patients (80 per group) will be enrolled in accordance with study inclusion and exclusion criteria. Patients will be randomised to receive either (1) ‘standard’ (in accordance with local hospital policy) CVAD dressings (control) or (2) ‘standard’ dressings in addition to MLA (intervention). Patients will be followed from the time of CVAD insertion to 48 h after CVAD removal. The primary outcome is ‘dressing failure’ defined as requirement for initial CVAD dressing to be replaced prior to seven days (routine replacement). Discussion This study will be the first randomised controlled trial to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of MLA in the adult intensive care unit population and will also provide crucial data for patient-important outcomes such as infection and skin injury. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12621001012864. Registered on 2 August 2021

Purpose:The purpose of this scoping review is to conduct a systematic search and establish the current state of evidence for tools and instruments used to measure self-reported outcomes and experiences, including satisfaction scores, specifically for peripheral venous access devices (PVADs).Methods:A systematic search of the literature will be conducted using medical databases including: MEDLINE (Ovid); CINAHL (EbscoHost); PubMed (NCBI); and Scopus (Elsevier); Google (Scholar); and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Experimental, and observational studies, published in English, after 1990 will be eligible for inclusion if they: consist of (i) a survey, instrument or tool that is designed to (ii) collect outcome, experience and/or satisfaction data, relating to PVAD insertion, care, maintenance and/or removal, among (iii) adult and paediatric participants.Conclusions:PVAD-specific patient-reported outcome and experience measures are necessary for researchers, clinicians and policy decision makers to explore more thoroughly the quality of PVAD care provided, and further inform health economic analyses in the context of quality improvement interventions for vascular access devices. This scoping review will establish the existence—or paucity—of instruments to measure these selfreported outcomes and experiences of PVADs, in order to guide value-based healthcare delivery into the future.

Introduction Haemorrhage is the leading cause of preventable death in combat settings. Pre-hospital practice guidelines advocate for the rapid delivery of blood products and intravenous access to deliver adjunct treatments. However, peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) insertion is challenging in the austere setting, and catheter failure is common. This study aims to investigate dressing and securement methods to prevent catheter dislodgement and explore participants’ experiences with these methods within an Australian Defence Force Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC) training course. Methods and analysis A two-phase mixed-method design will be used to compare the Ruggedised Field (Ranger) method with the S-Wrap technique to reduce PIVC dislodgement rates during TCCC simulations. The study will be undertaken at the Australian Army School of Health in Victoria, Australia. In Phase 1, we will examine the pull-out force of each dressing securement method in vitro. Phase 2 will involve (i) an observational audit (n=30 participants) of TCCC training to assess the quality and safety of PIVC securement practices and (ii) focus groups with participating healthcare professionals (HCPs) (n

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.