| Literature DB >> 24883388 |
Simon Juric1, Vojko Flis2, Matjaz Debevc3, Andreas Holzinger4, Borut Zalik5.
Abstract
Excessive venipunctures are both time- and resource-consuming events, which cause anxiety, pain, and distress in patients, or can lead to severe harmful injuries. We propose a low-cost mobile health solution for subcutaneous vein detection using near-infrared spectroscopy, along with an assessment of the current state of the art in this field. The first objective of this study was to get a deeper overview of the research topic, through the initial team discussions and a detailed literature review (using both academic and grey literature). The second objective, that is, identifying the commercial systems employing near-infrared spectroscopy, was conducted using the PubMed database. The goal of the third objective was to identify and evaluate (using the IEEE Xplore database) the research efforts in the field of low-cost near-infrared imaging in general, as a basis for the conceptual model of the upcoming prototype. Although the reviewed commercial devices have demonstrated usefulness and value for peripheral veins visualization, other evaluated clinical outcomes are less conclusive. Previous studies regarding low-cost near-infrared systems demonstrated the general feasibility of developing cost-effective vein detection systems; however, their limitations are restricting their applicability to clinical practice. Finally, based on the current findings, we outline the future research direction.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24883388 PMCID: PMC4032719 DOI: 10.1155/2014/365902
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ScientificWorldJournal ISSN: 1537-744X
Figure 1PubMed search strategy and literature selection process.
Figure 2IEEE Xplore database search strategy and literature selection process.
Overview of clinical studies evaluating NIR spectroscopy employment for medical applications.
| First author, year | Study design | Subject age | Number of study patients | Procedure | Procedure performed by | Procedure setting | Device used | Benefit to technology |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Hess [ | Historical control | 3 days–17 years | 91 | Peripheral IV catheter insertion | Nurses | Hospital | VeinViewer | Benefit |
|
| ||||||||
|
Strehle [ | Nonrandomized prospective | 0–16 years | 50 | Peripheral IV catheter insertion or blood draw | Consultants, registrars, senior house officers, and nurses | Outpatient | VeinViewer | N/A |
|
| ||||||||
| Cuper et al. [ | Historical control | 0–6 years | 125 | Blood draw | Phlebotomists | Phlebotomy station | VascuLuminator | Benefit |
|
| ||||||||
| Chapman et al. [ | Prospective randomized controlled | 0–17 years | 323 | Peripheral IV catheter insertion | Pediatric ER nurses | Pediatric ER, elective IVs | VeinViewer | Benefit |
|
| ||||||||
| Perry et al. [ | Prospective randomized controlled | 0–20 years | 123 | Peripheral IV catheter insertion | Pediatric ER nurses | Pediatric ER, elective IVs | VeinViewer | No benefit |
|
| ||||||||
| Cuper et al. [ | Nonrandomized prospective | <3 years | 77 | Arterial line insertion | Experienced pediatric anesthesiologists and nurse anesthetists | Operating room, before cardiothoracic surgery | VascuLuminator | No benefit |
|
| ||||||||
| Kaddoum et al. [ | Prospective randomized controlled | 0.18–17.1 years | 146 | Peripheral IV catheter insertion | Experienced pediatric anesthesiologists | Operating room, elective procedures | AccuVein AV 300 | No benefit |
|
| ||||||||
| Kim et al. [ | Prospective randomized controlled | 1 month–16 years | 111 | Peripheral IV catheter insertion | Nurses | Hospital | VeinViewer | Benefit |
|
| ||||||||
| Peterson et al. [ | Nonrandomized prospective | 0–19 years | 155 | Peripheral IV catheter insertion | Nurses | Hospital | VeinViewer | No benefit |
|
| ||||||||
| Phipps et al. [ | Prospective randomized controlled | Preterm and term neonates (23–40 weeks) | 115 | Peripheral IV catheter insertion | Expert level neonatal nurse practitioners and registered nurse peripheral IV catheter team | Hospital | VeinViewer | Benefit |
|
| ||||||||
| Cuper et al. [ | Cluster randomized | 0–18 years | 494 | Peripheral IV catheter insertion | Experienced pediatric anesthesiologists, nurse anesthetists, and trainees | Operating room, elective procedures | VascuLuminator | No benefit |
|
| ||||||||
| de Graaff et al. [ | Cluster randomized | 0–18 years | 1383 | Peripheral IV catheter insertion | Experienced pediatric anesthesiologists, nurse anesthetists, and trainees | Operating room, elective procedures | VeinViewer, AccuVein AV 300, VascuLuminator | No benefit |
|
| ||||||||
| Sun et al. [ | Prospective randomized controlled | 3 months–17 years | 60 | Peripheral IV catheter insertion | Nurses | Pediatric ICU | VeinViewer | Benefit |
|
| ||||||||
| van der Woude et al. [ | Cluster randomized | 0–15 years | 88 | Peripheral IV catheter insertion | Anesthesiologists | Operating room, elective procedures | VascuLuminator | No benefit |
Hess [70] (2010) evaluated patients for 6 months using standard techniques and compared the results to patients treated subsequently with the VeinViewer. Cuper et al. [71] (2011) evaluated patients for 10 weeks using standard techniques and compared the results to patients treated subsequently with the VascuLuminator. Benefits to technology were any considered benefits measured in the study populations (described in more detail in Table 2). N/A signifies no analysis performed (feasibility or less rigorous study demonstrating the general usability of the device).
Summary of Clinical Benefits of NIR spectroscopy employment.
| First author, year | Benefit to technology | Group with no significant findings | Subgroup with significant findings | Benefits seen | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First attempt success | Mean number of attempts | Time of procedure | Less Pain | Overall success | Nurses felt the device was helpful in difficult patients | ||||
| Hess [ | Benefit | N/A | All patients young | X | X | X | |||
|
| |||||||||
| Strehle [ | N/A | Used only to identify veins | |||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Cuper et al. [ | Benefit | N/A | All patients young | X | X | ||||
|
| |||||||||
| Chapman et al. [ | Benefit | All patients | 0–2 years | X | X | ||||
|
| |||||||||
| Perry et al. [ | No benefit | All patients | None | X | |||||
|
| |||||||||
| Cuper et al. [ | No benefit | All patients | None | ||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Kaddoum et al. [ | No benefit | All patients | None | ||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Kim et al. [ | Benefit | All patients | Difficult vein DIVA score >4 | X | |||||
|
| |||||||||
| Peterson et al. [ | No benefit | All patients | No subgroup analyses | ||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Phipps et al. [ | Benefit | All patients very young | Groups matched for gestational age | X | |||||
|
| |||||||||
| Cuper et al. [ | No Benefit | All patients | No improvement with subgroup analysis | ||||||
|
| |||||||||
| de Graaff et al. [ | No Benefit | All patients | No improvement with subgroup analysis | ||||||
|
| |||||||||
| Sun et al. [ | Benefit | All patients | No subgroup analyses | X | X | ||||
|
| |||||||||
| van der Woude et al. [ | No Benefit | All patients | Children considered to have “difficult” veins | X | |||||
Benefit to technology is listed as in Table 1. Overall analyses are described in Group with no significant findings. Results of subgroup analyses are presented in Subgroup with significant findings. Benefits Seen describes the benefits measured in the study. N/A signifies no analysis performed.
Risk factors for difficult IV insertion [7, 8, 10, 70].
| Risk parameter | |
|---|---|
| Dehydration | |
| History of difficult access | |
| Dark skin | |
| Obesity | |
| Hypotension | |
| Peripheral vasoconstriction | |
| Poor vein quality | |
| History of previous IV insertions | |
| Advanced age | |
| Young age, preterm and term neonates | |
| Drug abuse | |
| History of chemotherapy | |
| Telangiectasia | |
| Skin rash | |
| Low skill of the operator |
Figure 3High level conceptual model and architecture of the prototype, embedded in a wireframe of one of the target devices (smartphone). (1) Attachment which comprises a standard (converted to be NIR sensitive) USB camera and 4 NIR LEDs for the illumination of the target area (e.g., hand). (2) Illustration of 1 NIR LED illumination distribution, with the most luminous intensity around the center. (3) Micro-USB connection cable (data transmission and power supply for the attachment). (4) Software libraries (camera usage and management, image processing) written in the native Android layer (for performance optimizations). (5) User interface software components. Both (4) and (5) will be developed as a single Android-based mobile application applicable to mobile devices running Android OS version 4.0.3 (ICS) or above.
Figure 4Current result of the ongoing feasibility studies applying the proposed model to the target platform (standard mobile device). The first image shows the acquired image (converted to grayscale) using the initial version of the prototype (based on Figure 3). Subsequent images present the interim results of applying digital signal processing strategies in order to enhance and additionally visualize the vein pattern.