OBJECTIVE: We studied factors that affect satisfaction of patients who have undergone placement of peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs) by interventional radiologists and patients' willingness to undergo placement of future PICCs. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This longitudinal prospective consecutive cohort study included 85 patients referred for PICC placement. A record was made of catheter type, time taken for placement, patient age, and possible complications. Follow-up was obtained by telephone interview to determine the effect of site of placement in the arm, residence time of catheter, additional complications, and interference with activities of daily living on patient willingness to undergo future PICC placement at the same site. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine factors statistically predictive of patient willingness to undergo placement of future PICCs. RESULTS: Patients having PICCs placed above the elbow were more often satisfied (55 of 61 respondents) with catheter location than patients having placements at the elbow (three of 17 respondents). Patient willingness to undergo future PICC placement was strongly related to catheter location (p < .0001) and interference with activities of daily living (p < .0001). Catheter type, residence time, time taken for the placement, age, and complications were not associated with patient willingness to undergo future PICC placement. CONCLUSION: PICC placement above the elbow is more acceptable to patients than placement at the elbow. PICC placement above the elbow and patients' perception of less interference by the PICC with activities of daily living are positively related to patient willingness to undergo future PICC placement.
OBJECTIVE: We studied factors that affect satisfaction of patients who have undergone placement of peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs) by interventional radiologists and patients' willingness to undergo placement of future PICCs. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This longitudinal prospective consecutive cohort study included 85 patients referred for PICC placement. A record was made of catheter type, time taken for placement, patient age, and possible complications. Follow-up was obtained by telephone interview to determine the effect of site of placement in the arm, residence time of catheter, additional complications, and interference with activities of daily living on patient willingness to undergo future PICC placement at the same site. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine factors statistically predictive of patient willingness to undergo placement of future PICCs. RESULTS:Patients having PICCs placed above the elbow were more often satisfied (55 of 61 respondents) with catheter location than patients having placements at the elbow (three of 17 respondents). Patient willingness to undergo future PICC placement was strongly related to catheter location (p < .0001) and interference with activities of daily living (p < .0001). Catheter type, residence time, time taken for the placement, age, and complications were not associated with patient willingness to undergo future PICC placement. CONCLUSION: PICC placement above the elbow is more acceptable to patients than placement at the elbow. PICC placement above the elbow and patients' perception of less interference by the PICC with activities of daily living are positively related to patient willingness to undergo future PICC placement.
Authors: Jan Peter Goltz; Bernhard Petritsch; Johannes Kirchner; Dietbert Hahn; Ralph Kickuth Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2012-07-25 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Salvatore Giacomo Morano; Roberto Latagliata; Corrado Girmenia; Fulvio Massaro; Paola Berneschi; Alfonso Guerriero; Massimo Giampaoletti; Arianna Sammarco; Giorgia Annechini; Angelo Fama; Alice Di Rocco; Antonio Chistolini; Alessandra Micozzi; Matteo Molica; Walter Barberi; Clara Minotti; Gregorio Antonio Brunetti; Massimo Breccia; Claudio Cartoni; Saveria Capria; Giovanni Rosa; Giuliana Alimena; Robin Foà Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2015-04-26 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Simon Bessis; Nadim Cassir; Line Meddeb; Anne Bonnet Remacle; Jérôme Soussan; Vincent Vidal; Pierre-Edouard Fournier; Florence Fenollar; Didier Raoult; Philippe Brouqui Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 1.817