Association between delivery methods for red blood cell transfusion and the risk of venous thromboembolism: a longitudinal study

Peripherally inserted central catheters inserted with current best practices have low deep vein thrombosis and central line–associated bloodstream infection risk compared with centrally inserted central catheters: A contemporary meta-analysis

Background:

Peripherally inserted central catheters and centrally inserted central catheters have numerous benefits but can be associated with risks. This meta-analysis compared central catheters for relevant clinical outcomes using recent studies more likely to coincide with practice guidelines.

Methods:

Several databases, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and EBM Reviews were searched for articles (2006–2018) that compared central catheters. Analyses were limited to peer-reviewed studies comparing peripherally inserted central catheters to centrally inserted central catheters for deep vein thrombosis and/or central line–associated bloodstream infections. Subgroup, sensitivity analyses, and patient-reported measures were included. Risk ratios, incidence rate ratios, and weighted event risks were reported. Study quality assessment was conducted using Newcastle–Ottawa and Cochrane Risk of Bias scales.

Results:

Of 4609 screened abstracts, 31 studies were included in these meta-analyses. Across studies, peripherally inserted central catheters were protective for central line–associated bloodstream infection (incidence rate ratio = 0.52, 95% confidence interval: 0.30–0.92), with consistent results across subgroups. Peripherally inserted central catheters were associated with an increased risk of deep vein thrombosis (risk ratio = 2.08, 95% confidence interval: 1.47–2.94); however, smaller diameter and single-lumen peripherally inserted central catheters were no longer associated with increased risk. The absolute risk of deep vein thrombosis was calculated to 2.3% and 3.9% for smaller diameter peripherally inserted central catheters and centrally inserted central catheters, respectively. On average, peripherally inserted central catheter patients had 11.6 more catheter days than centrally inserted central catheter patients ( p = 0.064). Patient outcomes favored peripherally inserted central catheters.

Conclusion:

When adhering to best practices, this study demonstrated that concerns related to peripherally inserted central catheters and deep vein thrombosis risk are minimized. Dramatic changes to clinical practice over the last 10 years have helped to address past issues with central catheters and complication risk. Given the lower rate of complications when following current guidelines, clinicians should prioritize central line choice based on patient therapeutic needs, rather than fear of complications. Future research should continue to consider contemporary literature over antiquated data, such that it recognizes the implications of best practices in modern central catheterization.

Educating intensive care unit nurses to use central venous catheter infection prevention guidelines: effectiveness of an educational course

Background

Nurses' knowledge of central venous catheter-related infection (CVC-RI) prevention guidelines is poor, indicating that nurses do not receive proper education about these guidelines.

Aim

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of an educational course that aimed to improve nurses' knowledge about CVC-RI prevention guidelines.

Method

A sample of 131 nurses were randomly assigned to the experimental group (received an educational course) or control group (received no education). Pre-Post data were collected using a structured questionnaire that included a 23-item knowledge assessment.

Results

In the pre-test, all participants demonstrated poor knowledge, with mean scores of 8.2 (standard deviation = 3.6). After completion of the course, knowledge was significantly improved in the experimental group, whereas the control group showed no change (t(106,3) = 25.1, p = 0.00).

Conclusions

An educational course on CVC-RI prevention guidelines had an encouraging effect. Decision makers are recommended to implement such courses in their settings to improve nurses' competency.

ABO blood group related venous thrombosis risk in patients with peripherally inserted central catheters

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between ABO blood group and upper limb venous thrombosis (VT) risk in patients with peripherally inserted central catheters (PICC).

METHODS

Single centre retrospective cohort study. A cohort of patients who underwent PICC insertion from September 2010 to August 2014 were followed up for symptomatic VT presentations diagnosed by ultrasound. Blood group status was identified from hospital information systems.

RESULTS

2270 participants had 3020 PICCs inserted. There were 124 cases of symptomatic VT, an incident rate of 4% [95% confidence interval, CI (3-5%)]. Univariate analysis adjusting for the clustered sample showed that having chemotherapy, two or more previous PICCs, a larger catheter size, a diagnosis of cancer and having a blood group B were all associated with an increased risk of a VT. In the multivariate analysis, PICC diameter, cancer diagnosis and blood group B were all independently associated with increased risk of VT.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing PICC insertion with a blood group B appear to have a higher risk of VT, independent of risks attached to the PICC procedure and cancer diagnosis. Without any existing guidelines for PICC-related VT, this investigation creates a platform for further research to be conducted in order to establish guidelines. Advances in knowledge: Previous studies investigating VT risk associated with blood group status related to large heterogeneous populations. In this article, we look at patients specifically with PICC, which reduces the heterogeneity in the cohort. In addition, due to the substantial number of patients enrolled, we had a chance to perform multivariate analyses with statistical significance.