| Literature DB >> 35190407 |
Craig Antony McBride1,2,3, Sarfaraz Rahiman4, Luregn J Schlapbach4,5,6, Jessica A Schults2,4,7,8, Tricia M Kleidon9,2,7, Melanie Kennedy4, Rebecca S Paterson7, Joshua Byrnes2,10, Robert S Ware2,10, Amanda Judith Ullman2,6,7.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) frequently fail during therapy administration, resulting in infusates pooling in the surrounding tissue. These extravasation injuries can cause significant pain, tissue destruction and scarring. ivWatch is a biosensor that uses visible and near-infrared light to measure tissue changes surrounding the PIVC and alert clinicians when extravasation may occur. The effectiveness of ivWatch, in comparison to clinical observation, in decreasing injury severity is unknown. The present study aims to investigate whether using ivWatch may potentially detect injury earlier and decrease the severity of PIVC extravasation injuries. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A single centre, parallel group, open-label superiority randomised controlled trial comparing (a) standard care (clinical observation) to (b) ivWatch monitoring in addition to standard care, to decrease the severity of extravasation injuries. 200 children with PIVCs inserted in the distal half of the limb, receiving intermediate-risk to high-risk infusates for ≥24 hours, will be consecutively recruited at a paediatric intensive care unit in Queensland, Australia. The primary outcome is extravasation severity, measured by the Cincinnati Children's Extravasation Harm Scale. Secondary outcomes include severity assessed with three-dimensional camera imaging, extravasation volume, treatment sequelae, the number of PIVCs used and dwell time, quality of life and healthcare costs. The between treatment difference in extravasation severity will be compared using ordinal logistic regression, with the treatment group included as the main effect, and reported with corresponding 95% CIs. Estimates of value will be presented as net monetary benefits and cost per reduction in extravasation injury severity, both presented with corresponding 95% credible intervals. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study received approval from the Children's Health Queensland Hospital and Health Service Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) (reference number: HREC/20/QCHQ/60867) and the Griffith University HREC (reference number: 2020/310) and will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12620000317998. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.Entities:
Keywords: health economics; paediatric intensive & critical care; preventive medicine; qualitative research; wound management
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35190407 PMCID: PMC8862432 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047765
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 2.692
Figure 1Extravasation injury to the dorsum of the hand 2 days post injury caused by 10% dextrose and potassium infusion in a 5-week-old infant.
Figure 5The ivWatch Model 400 Patient Monitoring System (ivWatch LLC; Newport News, Virginia, USA) (image used with permission from the manufacturer).
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
| Inclusion criteria | Exclusion criteria |
|
PIVC (including a long PIVC) inserted in the distal half of the limb (ie, up to popliteal or antecubital fossae) PIVC is anticipated to be in situ for >24 hours Patient anticipated to be admitted to PICU for >24 hours Planned administration of ≥1 intermediate-risk to high-risk infusates, Informed consent from primary caregivers/legal guardians |
Other vascular access devices (including midline catheters and central venous catheters) Previous enrolment in the study Current ‘do not resuscitate’ order or receiving palliative care Under the protection of the Child and Family Services Primary caregivers/legal guardians do not speak English without the aid of an interpreter |
PICU, paediatric intensive care unit; PIVC, peripheral intravenous catheter.
Outcomes and measurement instruments
| Outcome(s) | Measurement tool(s) |
| Primary | |
| Extravasation severity |
Cincinnati Children’s Extravasation Harm |
| Secondary | |
| Extravasation volume |
Surface area to limb length ratio 3D and 2D camera imaging |
| Extravasation treatment sequelae |
Count of number and type of dressings Skin grafting and/or scar management required Duration of treatment, including active scar management (censored at 6 months) |
| PIVCs used and dwell time |
Count of number of PIVCs used per patient Dwell time of each (in hours) |
| Quality of life |
Brisbane Burns Scar Impact Profile at 1 month, 3 months and 6 months |
| Healthcare costs | Costs associated with: ivWatch Additional PIVCs Extravasation and sequelae Hospital length of stay |
| Acceptability |
Qualitative and quantitative interviews with parent and clinician surrounding acceptability with study intervention and control |
2D, two-dimensional; 3D, three-dimensional; PICU, paediatric intensive care unit; PIVC, peripheral intravenous catheter.
Schedule of enrolment, interventions and assessments
| Study period | ||||||
| Enrolment | Allocation | Post-allocation | Close-out | |||
| Timepoint | −t1 | t0 | t1 | t2 | t3 | t4 |
| Enrolment | ||||||
| Eligibility screen | ✓ | |||||
| Informed consent | ✓ | |||||
| Allocation | ✓ | |||||
| Interventions | ||||||
| Control arm | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| Intervention arm | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| Baseline variables | ||||||
| Demographic characteristics | ✓ | ✓ | ||||
| Clinical/treatment characteristics | ✓ | ✓ | ||||
| Device characteristics | ✓ | ✓ | ||||
| Outcome variables | ||||||
| Extravasation severity | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Extravasation volume | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Extravasation treatment sequelae | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| PIVCs used | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| PIVC dwell time | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| Quality of life | ✓ | ✓ | ||||
| Healthcare costs | ✓ | |||||
| Participant and clinician interviews | ✓ | |||||
Control arm: standard care; intervention arm: standard care +ivWatch; −t1: admitted to PICU requiring a PIVC; t0: enrolled in the study and randomised to either the intervention or control arm of the study; t1: daily checks of PIVC while inserted and patient admitted to PICU; t2: 7-day follow-up following PIVC removal or discharge from PICU; t3: 28-day follow-up following PIVC removal or discharge from PICU; and t4: end of the study.
PICU, paediatric intensive care unit; PIVC, peripheral intravenous catheter.
Qualitative interview questions
| Clinicians | Families/caregivers |
|
What was your experience with ivWatch? |
How did you find ivWatch? |
|
Did the presence of ivWatch influence your ability to assess the PIVC, insertion site or surrounding area? |
Have you ever had an experience with an extravasation injury with a PIVC? |
|
Do you have any comments on the ivWatch monitoring equipment? |
Was the presence of ivWatch acceptable to you? (NRS: 1–10) |
|
Do you have any further comments regarding ivWatch? | |
|
Was the presence of ivWatch acceptable to you? (NRS: 1–10) |
NRS, Numerical Rating Scale; PIVC, peripheral intravenous catheter.