Literature DB >> 11759308

Satisfaction versus dissatisfaction with venous access devices in outpatient oncology: a pilot study.

C Chernecky1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE/
OBJECTIVES: To examine outpatient oncology satisfaction/dissatisfaction with venous access devices (VADs), identify positive and negative experiences, and determine their overall effect on quality of life.
DESIGN: Descriptive.
SETTING: Outpatient oncology clinic in the United States. SAMPLE: Convenience sample of 24 patients who had a VAD and were receiving outpatient chemotherapy treatments.
METHODS: Consecutive patients meeting study criteria were invited to complete a two-page questionnaire during their clinic visit. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: VAD, satisfaction, dissatisfaction, quality of life.
FINDINGS: Patients were extremely happy with VADs. The top three benefits were (a) decreased pain compared to venipuncture, (b) the need for fewer needlesticks, and (c) quicker blood draws for laboratory analysis. Negative experiences were infrequent, but 29% of subjects cited monthly heparinization, sleep disturbances, and site soreness following chemotherapy treatments. Overall, 92% stated that the VAD had improved their quality of life.
CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy outpatients were extremely happy with their VAD, found many benefits, and stated that it improved their quality of life. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Nurses need to support the use of VADs early with patients receiving multiple chemotherapy treatments on an outpatient basis. Research and education need to continue regarding heparinization and discuss interventions to reduce site soreness and sleep disturbances.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11759308

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oncol Nurs Forum        ISSN: 0190-535X            Impact factor:   2.172


  6 in total

1.  Fracture and migration of implantable venous access port catheters: Cause analysis and management of 4 cases.

Authors:  Shu-Ping Xiao; Bin Xiong; Jun Chu; Xiao-Fang Li; Qi Yao; Chuan-Sheng Zheng
Journal:  J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci       Date:  2015-10-22

Review 2.  Totally implantable vascular access devices 30 years after the first procedure. What has changed and what is still unsolved?

Authors:  Roberto Biffi; Adriana Toro; Simonetta Pozzi; Isidoro Di Carlo
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  No impact of central venous insertion site on oncology patients' quality of life and psychological distress. A randomized three-arm trial.

Authors:  Roberto Biffi; Franco Orsi; Simonetta Pozzi; Andrea Maldifassi; Davide Radice; Nicole Rotmensz; Maria Giulia Zampino; Nicola Fazio; Giulia Peruzzotti; Florence Didier
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2010-08-28       Impact factor: 3.603

Review 4.  Adult oncology patients' experiences of living with a central venous catheter: a systematic review and meta-synthesis.

Authors:  Dhurata Ivziku; Raffaella Gualandi; Francesca Pesce; Anna De Benedictis; Daniela Tartaglini
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2022-01-14       Impact factor: 3.603

5.  Inherent and modifiable risk factors for peripheral venous catheter failure during cancer treatment: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Emily N Larsen; Nicole Marsh; Catherine O'Brien; Emily Monteagle; Christopher Friese; Claire M Rickard
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2020-07-24       Impact factor: 3.603

6.  Not "just" an intravenous line: Consumer perspectives on peripheral intravenous cannulation (PIVC). An international cross-sectional survey of 25 countries.

Authors:  Marie Cooke; Amanda J Ullman; Gillian Ray-Barruel; Marianne Wallis; Amanda Corley; Claire M Rickard
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-02-28       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.