PURPOSE: To assess the effectiveness of four securement methods to prevent peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) failure. METHODS: A single-centre, four-arm, randomised, controlled, non-blinded, superiority pilot trial was conducted in a tertiary referral hospital in Queensland (Australia), between November 2012 and January 2013. Adult patients, with a PIVC expected to remain in situ for ≥24 hours and admitted to general medical or surgical wards, were randomly allocated to standard polyurethane dressing (control, SPU), tissue adhesive (TA) with an SPU, bordered polyurethane dressing (BPU) or sutureless securement device (SSD) with an SPU, experimental groups. The primary endpoint was PIVC failure, defined as premature device removal before the end of therapy because of pain, blockage, leaking, accidental removal and local or catheter-related bloodstream infection. RESULTS: PIVCs were used for an average of 2.6 days across all study groups (n = 85). Catheter failure was lowest in the TA group (3/21, 14%) and highest in the control group (8/21, 38%), with BPU and SSD failure at 5/20 (25%) and 5/23 (22%), respectively. The adjusted hazard ratio of catheter failure was lowest in the TA group (0.50, 95% CI: 0.13-1.98), and then the BPU (0.52, 95% CI: 0.15-1.78) and SSD (0.61, 95% CI: 0.20-1.91) groups. No patient was suspected of a local or catheter-related bloodstream infection. CONCLUSIONS: Current SPU dressings alone do not prevent many cases of PIVC failure. TA appears promising as an innovative solution, but may not be suitable for all patients. A larger Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC)-funded trial has commenced.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To assess the effectiveness of four securement methods to prevent peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) failure. METHODS: A single-centre, four-arm, randomised, controlled, non-blinded, superiority pilot trial was conducted in a tertiary referral hospital in Queensland (Australia), between November 2012 and January 2013. Adult patients, with a PIVC expected to remain in situ for ≥24 hours and admitted to general medical or surgical wards, were randomly allocated to standard polyurethane dressing (control, SPU), tissue adhesive (TA) with an SPU, bordered polyurethane dressing (BPU) or sutureless securement device (SSD) with an SPU, experimental groups. The primary endpoint was PIVC failure, defined as premature device removal before the end of therapy because of pain, blockage, leaking, accidental removal and local or catheter-related bloodstream infection. RESULTS: PIVCs were used for an average of 2.6 days across all study groups (n = 85). Catheter failure was lowest in the TA group (3/21, 14%) and highest in the control group (8/21, 38%), with BPU and SSD failure at 5/20 (25%) and 5/23 (22%), respectively. The adjusted hazard ratio of catheter failure was lowest in the TA group (0.50, 95% CI: 0.13-1.98), and then the BPU (0.52, 95% CI: 0.15-1.78) and SSD (0.61, 95% CI: 0.20-1.91) groups. No patient was suspected of a local or catheter-related bloodstream infection. CONCLUSIONS: Current SPU dressings alone do not prevent many cases of PIVC failure. TA appears promising as an innovative solution, but may not be suitable for all patients. A larger Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC)-funded trial has commenced.
Authors: Claire M Rickard; Nicole M Marsh; Joan Webster; Nicole C Gavin; Raymond J Chan; Alexandra L McCarthy; Peter Mollee; Amanda J Ullman; Tricia Kleidon; Vineet Chopra; Li Zhang; Matthew R McGrail; Emily Larsen; Md Abu Choudhury; Samantha Keogh; Evan Alexandrou; David J McMillan; Merehau Cindy Mervin; David L Paterson; Marie Cooke; Gillian Ray-Barruel; Maria Isabel Castillo; Andrew Hallahan; Amanda Corley; E Geoffrey Playford Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-06-15 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Taressa Bull; Amanda Corley; Danielle J Smyth; David J McMillan; Kimble R Dunster; John F Fraser Journal: Intensive Care Med Exp Date: 2018-03-12
Authors: Amanda J Ullman; Tricia Kleidon; Victoria Gibson; Debbie A Long; Tara Williams; Craig A McBride; Andrew Hallahan; Gabor Mihala; Marie Cooke; Claire M Rickard Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2016-06-03 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Pedro Parreira; Beatriz Serambeque; Paulo S Costa; Lisete S Mónico; Vânia Oliveira; Liliana B Sousa; Fernando Gama; Rafael A Bernardes; David Adriano; Inês A Marques; Luciene M Braga; João Graveto; Nádia Osório; Anabela Salgueiro-Oliveira Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-09-08 Impact factor: 3.390