Literature DB >> 22998716

Routine versus clinically indicated replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters: a randomised controlled equivalence trial.

Claire M Rickard1, Joan Webster, Marianne C Wallis, Nicole Marsh, Matthew R McGrail, Venessa French, Lynelle Foster, Peter Gallagher, John R Gowardman, Li Zhang, Alice McClymont, Michael Whitby.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The millions of peripheral intravenous catheters used each year are recommended for 72-96 h replacement in adults. This routine replacement increases health-care costs and staff workload and requires patients to undergo repeated invasive procedures. The effectiveness of the practice is not well established. Our hypothesis was that clinically indicated catheter replacement is of equal benefit to routine replacement.
METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, non-blinded equivalence trial recruited adults (≥18 years) with an intravenous catheter of expected use longer than 4 days from three hospitals in Queensland, Australia, between May 20, 2008, and Sept 9, 2009. Computer-generated random assignment (1:1 ratio, no blocking, stratified by hospital, concealed before allocation) was to clinically indicated replacement, or third daily routine replacement. Patients, clinical staff, and research nurses could not be masked after treatment allocation because of the nature of the intervention. The primary outcome was phlebitis during catheterisation or within 48 h after removal. The equivalence margin was set at 3%. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. Secondary endpoints were catheter-related bloodstream and local infections, all bloodstream infections, catheter tip colonisation, infusion failure, catheter numbers used, therapy duration, mortality, and costs. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12608000445370.
FINDINGS: All 3283 patients randomised (5907 catheters) were included in our analysis (1593 clinically indicated; 1690 routine replacement). Mean dwell time for catheters in situ on day 3 was 99 h (SD 54) when replaced as clinically indicated and 70 h (13) when routinely replaced. Phlebitis occurred in 114 of 1593 (7%) patients in the clinically indicated group and in 114 of 1690 (7%) patients in the routine replacement group, an absolute risk difference of 0·41% (95% CI -1·33 to 2·15%), which was within the prespecified 3% equivalence margin. No serious adverse events related to study interventions occurred.
INTERPRETATION: Peripheral intravenous catheters can be removed as clinically indicated; this policy will avoid millions of catheter insertions, associated discomfort, and substantial costs in both equipment and staff workload. Ongoing close monitoring should continue with timely treatment cessation and prompt removal for complications. FUNDING: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22998716     DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61082-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  54 in total

1.  Improving Vascular Access Outcomes and Enhancing Practice.

Authors:  Valerie Platt; Seth Osenkarski
Journal:  J Infus Nurs       Date:  2018 Nov/Dec

2.  Lifespan and associated factors of peripheral intravenous Cannula among infants admitted in public hospitals of Mekelle City, Tigray, Ethiopia, 2016.

Authors:  Eskedar Birhane; Kalayou Kidanu; Mekuria Kassa; Dawit Gerezgiher; Lidia Tsegay; Brhanu Weldu; Genet Kidane; Hadgu Gerensea
Journal:  BMC Nurs       Date:  2017-06-15

3.  Relative incidence of phlebitis associated with peripheral intravenous catheters in the lower versus upper extremities.

Authors:  A Benaya; Y Schwartz; R Kory; A M Yinnon; E Ben-Chetrit
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2015-01-07       Impact factor: 3.267

4.  Is clinically indicated replacement of peripheral catheters as safe as routine replacement in preventing phlebitis and other complications?

Authors:  Maddalena Alessandra Wu; Francesco Casella
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2013-04-06       Impact factor: 3.397

5.  Can we trust equivalence and non-inferiority trials?

Authors:  Giovanni Casazza; Monica Solbiati
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2013-04-12       Impact factor: 3.397

6.  PURLs: optimal timing for peripheral IV replacement?

Authors:  Dionna Brown; Kate Rowland
Journal:  J Fam Pract       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 0.493

7.  epic3: national evidence-based guidelines for preventing healthcare-associated infections in NHS hospitals in England.

Authors:  H P Loveday; J A Wilson; R J Pratt; M Golsorkhi; A Tingle; A Bak; J Browne; J Prieto; M Wilcox
Journal:  J Hosp Infect       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 3.926

8.  Incidence and risk factors of infections associated with peripheral intravenous catheters.

Authors:  Tiroumourougane Serane; Bhuvaneswari Kothendaraman
Journal:  J Infect Prev       Date:  2016-03-23

Review 9.  Implantable Device-Related Infection.

Authors:  J Scott VanEpps; John G Younger
Journal:  Shock       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 3.454

Review 10.  Infection risks associated with peripheral vascular catheters.

Authors:  Li Zhang; Siyu Cao; Nicole Marsh; Gillian Ray-Barruel; Julie Flynn; Emily Larsen; Claire M Rickard
Journal:  J Infect Prev       Date:  2016-07-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.