Intermittently delivered IV medication and pH: reevaluating the evidence

Classification of non-antineoplastic intravenously administered drugs according to their toxicity risk: the path towards safe drug administration

OBJECTIVE

Extravasation is a potential complication resulting from parenteral administration of drugs. The purpose of this study was to characterise the physicochemical properties of non-antineoplastic parenterally administered drugs and determine their potential to cause a toxic effect on tissue.

METHODS

A list of drugs administered by intermittent or continuous intravenous (IV) infusion was prepared. A database was also established to collect information from the literature. Each active substance was classified according to its risk to cause tissue damage using the following criteria: (1) High risk: active substances presenting with any of the following characteristics: osmolarity of the IV solution form >500 mOsm/L; vasoconstriction; vesication; cellular toxicity; very common, common or uncommon adverse events such as phlebitis, necrosis or pain at the site of administration according to the Summary of Product Characteristics. (2) Moderate risk: active substances where the pH range was <3 or >11 or where adverse events at the site of administration occurred rarely, very rarely or with unknown frequency. (3) Low risk: active substances where the osmolarity of the IV solution was <500 mOsm/L and the pH ranged between 3 and 11. These active substances did not cause vasoconstriction, neither were they classified as vesicant or cytotoxic or presented with adverse events at the site of administration.

RESULTS

The risk classification list included 138 active substances, of which 86 were classified as 'high risk', 18 as 'moderate risk' and 34 as 'low risk'.

CONCLUSION

The classification of intravenously administered drugs according to their risk profile is useful to ensure their safe use, as it can be used to implement the necessary safety measures to prevent adverse events.

Control Volume Analysis of the Infusion Rate in Cephalic and Median Cubital Veins Based on Infusion Bag Height and Peripheral Venous Catheter Inner Diameter: Application of Bernoulli's Equation and Consideration of Frictional Forces

Purpose

This pilot study aimed to provide basic data on intravenous infusion nursing by analyzing the infusion rate in the cephalic and median cubital veins depending on the height of the infusion bag and inner diameter of the peripheral venous catheter (PVC).

Methods

While infusing 0.9% normal saline at 22 °C (room temperature) into elbow cephalic and median cubital veins, the infusion rate may be controlled by adjusting the fluid height and PVC diameter. To assess the validity of the laminar flow assumption, the study estimated the Reynolds number (Re) using the velocity obtained by applying Bernoulli's equation considering the friction coefficient.

Results

At a constant fluid height, the infusion rate increased with increasing PVC diameter. At a constant PVC diameter, the infusion rate increased with increasing fluid height. In a comparison between the cephalic and median cubital veins at constant fluid height and PVC diameter, the solution was infused at a higher rate into the cephalic vein, which was under lower venous pressure.

Conclusion

The analysis of the infusion rate according to fluid height and PVC diameter provided basic data on intravenous infusion nursing. The results are expected to provide evidence for the standardization of intravenous infusion nursing.

The neonatal DAV-expert algorithm: a GAVeCeLT/GAVePed consensus for the choice of the most appropriate venous access in newborns

In most NICUs, the choice of the venous access device currently relies upon the operator's experience and preferences. However, considering the high failure rate of vascular devices in the neonatal population, such clinical choice has a critical relevance and should preferably be based on the best available evidence. Though some algorithms have been published over the last 5 years, none of them seems in line with the current scientific evidence. Thus, the GAVePed-which is the pediatric interest group of the most important Italian group on venous access, GAVeCeLT-has developed a national consensus about the choice of the venous access device in the neonatal population. After a systematic review of the available evidence, the panel of the consensus (which included Italian neonatologists specifically experts in this area) has provided structured recommendations answering four sets of questions regarding (1) umbilical venous catheters, (2) peripheral cannulas, (3) epicutaneo-cava catheters, and (4) ultrasound-guided centrally and femorally inserted central catheters. Only statements reaching a complete agreement were included in the final recommendations. All recommendations were also structured as a simple visual algorithm, so as to be easily translated into clinical practice.  Conclusion: The goal of the present consensus is to offer a systematic set of recommendations on the choice of the most appropriate vascular access device in Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.

Pushing the agenda for intravenous push administration in outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy

Intravenous push (IVP) antimicrobial administration refers to rapid bolus infusion of medication. This drug delivery method offers improved patient convenience, superior patient and nursing satisfaction, and cost savings when used in outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT). Antimicrobial agents must demonstrate optimal physiochemical and pharmacologic characteristics, as well as sufficient syringe stability, to be administered in this manner. Additionally, impacts on medication tolerability, patient safety, and effectiveness must be considered. This narrative review summarizes the available data and practical implications of IVP administration of antimicrobials in the OPAT setting.

Antibiotics Tubes and Lines

Antibiotic prophylaxis in interventional radiology (IR) is widely used; however, such practice is based on data from the surgical literature. Although published guidelines can help determine the need for prophylactic antibiotic use in the patient undergoing percutaneous procedures, local practice patterns often dictate when such medications are given. In this article, the current state of periprocedural antibiotic use in commonly performed IR procedures (i.e., tube and catheter placements) is presented.

Identification of potentially irritating intravenous medications

AIMS

To identify commonly used intravenous drugs that may produce endothelial damage.

METHODS

An experimental research study was performed using a sample of 62 intravenous drugs commonly used in emergency care, pH and osmolarity were measured. Subsequently, based on these values, the theoretical capacity to cause irritation or endovascular damage was determined and classified as high, moderate, and low.

RESULTS

Samples from 19 drugs for fluid therapy, 21 antibiotics and 22 drugs for intravenous use were studied. Glucose solutions, sodium bicarbonate 1M and mannitol 10% showed a high capacity to cause venous irritation. Vancomycin, ciprofloxacin, amiodarone, haloperidol, and labetalol solution presented a high capacity for irritation based on their acidic pH. The antibiotics, dexketoprofen, diazepam, digoxin, etomidate, phenytoin, levetiracetam and metamizole also showed high osmotic values in their reconstituted or undiluted presentations. Moreover, osmolarity of diazepam, digoxin and phenytoin remained high despite being diluted in 100 ml of saline.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowing the pH and osmolarity of intravenous drugs allows their capacity to cause endothelial damage to be assessed. The use of comprehensive tables based on the chemical properties of the drugs can be a useful tool to help prevent chemically-induced phlebitis.

Intravenous antimicrobial administration through peripheral venous catheters - establishing risk profiles from an analysis of 5252 devices

INTRODUCTION

Peripheral venous catheters (PVCs) are used to administer antimicrobials, but many fail prior to completion of therapy. While some antimicrobials are known to increase the PVC failure rate, risk profiles for many are unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize data from prospective PVC studies conducted between 2013 and 2019 to determine associations between common antimicrobials and PVC failure.

METHODS

A secondary analysis was undertaken of seven randomized controlled trials and two prospective cohort studies from three quaternary hospitals (two adult and one paediatric) in Australia between 2013 and 2019. The primary outcome was PVC failure due to vessel injury (occlusion, infiltration or extravasation) or irritation (pain or phlebitis). Associations between antimicrobial use and PVC failure were explored using multi-variable Cox regression.

RESULTS

In total, 5252 PVCs (4478 patients) were analysed; vessel injury and irritations occurred in 19% and 11% of all PVCs, respectively. Vessel injury was significantly associated with cefepime hydrochloride [hazard ratio (HR) 2.50; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.44-4.34], ceftazidime pentahydrate (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.11-3.31), flucloxacillin sodium (HR 1.84, 95% CI 1.45-2.33), lincomycin hydrochloride (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.10-2.52) and vancomycin hydrochloride (HR 1.73, 95% CI 1.25-2.40). Irritation was significantly associated with flucloxacillin sodium (HR 2.58, 95% CI 1.96-3.40).

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified several antimicrobials associated with increased PVC failure, including some that were already known to be associated and some that had not been identified previously. Research is needed urgently to determine superior modes of delivery (e.g. dilution, infusion time, device type) that may prevent PVC failure.

A Meta-Analysis of Incidence of Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infection with Midline Catheters and Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters

In order to provide reference for the prevention and treatment of CRBSI during clinical intravenous infusion therapy, this paper investigates the incidence of catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) in the treatment of midline catheters (MCs) and peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) by intravenous infusion. Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ProQuest are searched to collect CRBSI-related studies on MC and PICC. The retrieval time is from the database construction to August 2020. Two researchers independently searched and screened literature quality evaluation and extracted data according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and RevMan 5.3 software was used for analysis. Eleven studies are included, with a total of 33809 patients. The incidence of CRBSI in the MC group is 0.599% (43/7079), and that in the PICC group is 0.4993% (133/26630). Meta-analysis showed that the incidence of CRBSI in the MC group is higher than that in the PICC group (OR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.43–1.08, P=0.11), and the difference is statistically significant when low-quality studies are excluded (OR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.39–0.93, P=0.02). There is no significant difference in the incidence of CRBSI between MC group and PICC group (P > 0.05), American subgroup (OR = 0.52), and British subgroup (OR = 4.86), the results of the two groups are opposite, and the incidence of CRBSI between the MC group and PICC group is statistically significant. There is no significant difference in the incidence of CRBSI between the adult and other subgroups (all P > 0.05). There is no significant difference in the incidence of CRBSI between the MC group and the PICC group (P > 0.05). Overall, the inter-study stability is general, the quality is good and the medium is good, and there is no obvious publication bias. The risk of CRBSI in MC and PICC is systematically evaluated and meta-analyzed for the first time. The incidence of CRBSI in MC group is lower than that in PICC group during intravenous infusion therapy. Under the same conditions, MC patients can be given priority for intravenous infusion therapy. More high-quality and child-related studies are needed to further evaluate and explore the risk of CRBSI between MC and PICC.

Does the Midline Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Have a Place in Critical Care?

BACKGROUND

The goals of infusion therapy are to preserve vascular health and safely deliver needed treatment. Achieving these goals is challenging in critical care because of the complexity of the treatment required. Daily justification of retaining an existing central venous catheter also creates urgency to change to a peripheral vascular access device. The midline catheter has had a resurgence in use because of the need for a long-term peripheral vascular access device not linked to central catheter-associated bloodstream infection risk.

OBJECTIVE

To review the characteristics of midline catheters, the benefits and risks of midline catheters, and current evidence regarding midline catheter use in critical care.

RESULTS

Research related to midline catheters has greatly expanded the body of knowledge regarding vascular access device selection and midline catheter use.

DISCUSSION

Although the quality and results of research on vascular access devices vary widely, a more accurate safety profile is emerging to illustrate how midline catheter use can support the goals of infusion therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimizing vascular access device selection requires recognition that every vascular access device can cause patient harm. Although the midline catheter appears to fill an important niche in infusion therapy, use of the midline catheter should be carefully evaluated. Midline catheters should not be used as a catheter-associated bloodstream infection prevention strategy, should be inserted to administer peripherally compatible solutions, and should be considered for short-term continuous vesicant therapy only in emergent situations until more definitive vascular access can be achieved.

Peripheral intravenous catheter failure: A secondary analysis of risks from 11,830 catheters

BACKGROUND

Peripheral intravenous catheters are an essential medical device which are prone to complications and failure.

OBJECTIVES

Identify patient, provider and device risk factors associated with all-cause peripheral intravenous catheter failure as well as individual complications: phlebitis, infiltration/occlusion, and dislodgement to improve patient outcomes.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of twelve prospective studies performed between 2008 and 2020.

SETTINGS

Australian metropolitan and regional hospitals including one paediatric hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants were from medical, surgical, haematology, and oncology units.

METHODS

Multilevel mixed-effects parametric survival regression was used to identify factors associated with all-cause peripheral intravenous catheter failure, phlebitis, occlusion/infiltration, and dislodgement. We studied patient (e.g., age, gender), device (e.g., gauge), and provider (e.g., inserting clinician) variables. Stepwise regression involved clinically and p<0.20 significant variables entered into the multivariable model. Results were expressed as hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI); p<0.01 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Of 11,830 peripheral intravenous catheters (8,200 participants) failure occurred in 36% (n = 4,263). Occlusion/infiltration incidence was 23% (n = 2,767), phlebitis 12% (n = 1,421), and dislodgement 7% (n = 779) of catheters. Patient factors significantly associated with failure and complications were: female gender (phlebitis; (HR 1.98, 95% CI 1.72-2.27), (infiltration/occlusion; HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.33-1.58), (failure; HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.26-1.46); and each year increase in age (phlebitis; 0.99 HR, 95% CI 0.98-0.99), (failure; 0.99 HR, 95% CI 0.99-0.99). The strongest provider risk factor was intravenous antibiotics (infiltration/occlusion; HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.27-1.53), (phlebitis; HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.18-1.56), (failure; HR 1.26, 95% CI 1.17-1.36). Catheters inserted by vascular access teams were less likely to dislodge (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.42-0.67). Device risk factors most associated with all-cause failure were wrist/hand (HR 1.34, 95% CI 1.23-1.46), antecubital fossa peripheral intravenous catheters (HR 1.29, 95% CI 1.16-1.44) and 22/24 gauge (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.12-1.45) catheters.

CONCLUSION

Factors identified, including the protective aspect of vascular access team insertion, and high catheter failure associated with intravenous antibiotic administration, will allow targeted updates of peripheral intravenous catheter guidelines and models of care.

Experience in the use of midclavicular catheters: An inception cohort study

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To describe the outcomes of midclavicular catheters related to first insertion success rate, catheter dwell time, rate of catheter survival until the end of the treatment, and complication rates, as well as identify risk factors associated with early catheter removal.

BACKGROUND

Midclavicular catheters are peripheral venous catheters that are typically 20-25 cm in length.

DESIGN

Inception cohort study.

METHODS

We included all the midclavicular lines inserted in patients who met any of the following criteria: (a) difficult venous access; (b) administration of intravenous therapy expected to last between 6 and 30 days with non-irritant (pH=5-9) and/or non-vesicant drugs; or (c) contraindications to central venous catheter placement. The incidence of adverse events was calculated using percentages and episodes per 1,000 catheter days. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify significant risk factors for unexpected catheter removal by calculating odds ratios. Catheter survival was assessed using Cox regression analysis. The STROBE guidelines were followed.

RESULTS

Overall, 2,275 midclavicular lines were placed in 1,841 participants. The insertion success rate was 99.4% and the mean catheter dwell time was 21.82 days. The rate of adverse events was .7 per 1,000 catheter days, the most common complications being thrombosis (.39) and catheter-associated bacteraemia (.14). No significant association was found between adverse events and the administration of irritant drugs. The incidence of unexpected removal was 6.7 per 1,000 catheter days. The multivariate analysis showed that both age ≤70 years and home therapy were associated with a lower likelihood of catheter failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Midclavicular catheters are associated with a high rate of insertion success and low rates of adverse events and unplanned removal.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Midclavicular lines are a safe alternative for intravenous therapy lasting more than 6 days, even with irritant drugs.

Assessing and Restoring Patency in Midline Catheters

Maintaining and restoring patency in midline catheters has been a significant issue in the hospitalized patient requiring a multitude of infusates and frequent blood specimen collection. Currently, clinicians may not use this device as often as clinically indicated because they lack an approved intervention to treat thrombotic occlusions. The purpose of this research was to show evidence that alteplase, a US Food and Drug Administration-approved thrombolytic for central vascular access devices, is a safe and effective thrombolytic for midline catheters. A prospective open label study of 497 midline catheters was conducted from July 2018 to December 2018. Of those studied, 112 devices were treated with 1 mg of alteplase, and 109 had patency restored with 1 dose. None of the 112 patients had a major adverse event, and only 1 minor event was recorded and was resolved without removal of the midline catheter. Treating occluded central vascular access devices with 2 mg of alteplase has been safe and effective since 2001. With this research, safety and efficacy appears to be established for 1 mg of alteplase, repeat times 1 mg if necessary, in midline catheters. With the option to treat patients with occluded midline catheters rather than replace, clinicians can reduce cost, increase patient satisfaction, and preserve vein health.

Standardization and Chemical Characterization of Intravenous Therapy in Adult Patients: A Step Further in Medication Safety

BACKGROUND

Intravenous drug administration is associated with potential complications, such as phlebitis. The physiochemical characteristics of the infusate play a very important role in some of these problems.

AIM

The aim of this study was to standardize the dilutions of intravenous drugs most commonly used in hospitalized adult patients and to characterize their pH, osmolarity and cytotoxic nature to better guide the selection of the most appropriate vascular access.

METHODS

The project was conducted in three phases: (i) standardization of intravenous therapy, which was conducted using a modified double-round Delphi method; (ii) characterization of the dilutions agreed on in the previous phase by means of determining the osmolarity and pH of each of the agreed concentrations, and recording the vesicant nature based on the information in literature; and (iii) algorithm proposal for selecting the most appropriate vascular access, taking into account the information gathered in the previous phases.

RESULTS

In total, 112 drugs were standardized and 307 different admixtures were assessed for pH, osmolarity and vesicant nature. Of these, 123 admixtures (40%), had osmolarity values >600 mOsm/L, pH < 4 or > 9, or were classified as vesicants. In these cases, selection of the most suitable route of infusion and vascular access device is crucial to minimize the risk of phlebitis-type complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing safety of intravenous therapy should be a priority in the healthcare settings. Knowing the characteristics of drugs to assess the risk involved in their administration related to their physicochemical nature may be useful to guide decision making regarding the most appropriate vascular access and devices.

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.

Phlebitis in Intravenous Amiodarone Administration: Incidence and Contributing Factors

BACKGROUND

Intravenous amiodarone is the gold-standard treatment for arrhythmias, but phlebitis is a common adverse effect.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the incidence and contributing factors of amiodarone-induced phlebitis and examine phlebitis severity.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted of articles published before February 2016 in the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and gray databases (Bielefeld, Lenus, EUGrey, RIAN, and DART). All studies in which amiodarone-induced phlebitis was a primary or secondary outcome were included. Meta-analysis was not appropriate because of study heterogeneity. Studies of the same contributing factors were analyzed together.

RESULTS

In the 20 included studies, phlebitis incidence ranged from 0% to 85%. Increasing the infusion concentration from 1.2 mg/mL to 1.8 mg/mL increased the phlebitis rate (P < .001). Total amiodarone doses greater than 1 g resulted in higher phlebitis rates than did doses less than 0.45 mg (P < .001). Most infusion durations and rates were not correlated with phlebitis incidence. However, phlebitis incidence was lower with bolus administration than with longer infusions (P = .002). The use of in-line filters and nursing guidelines significantly reduced phlebitis rates (P < .001) and phlebitis severity. The most common phlebitis severity grades, in descending order, were 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding factors that increase the risk of amiodarone-induced phlebitis can guide better practice. In-line filters and nursing guidelines should always be implemented when administering intravenous amiodarone. Increased surveillance is required when higher dosages and concentrations are used.

Epirubicin chemotherapy in women with breast cancer: Alternating arms for intravenous administration to reduce chemical phlebitis

OBJECTIVE

To establish whether using alternating arms for peripheral intravenous epirubicin administration affects the severity or duration of epirubicin-induced phlebitis.

METHODS

An observational study of women with breast cancer (n = 237) in a UK Cancer Centre. Data were analysed after receiving three treatment cycles according to the arm used for epirubicin administration: same, alternating or mixed arm (two consecutive cycles in one arm and one in the alternate arm). Phlebitis severity was graded by clinical staff after each treatment; participants also self-reported symptoms during treatment and for up to 6 months after.

RESULTS

The alternating arm group experienced significantly less severe symptoms than the other arm use groups, 6% (4 of 64) compared with 34% (p < 0.001, odds ratio: 0.13 (95% CI: 0.043-0.38) alternating arm compared with same arm group). The alternating arm group reported less pain (p = 0.013), lower overall impact (p = 0.009), lower effect on function (p = 0.032) and shorter duration of symptoms (p = 0.001) than the other arm use groups.

CONCLUSION

Using alternating arms for peripheral administration of epirubicin significantly reduces the severity and duration of chemical phlebitis and is recommended to improve patient experience and reduce the need for central venous access devices.

Optimizing vascular-access device decision-making in the era of midline catheters

This narrative review addresses vascular access device choice from peripheral intravenous catheters through central venous catheters, including the evolving use of midline catheters. The review incorporates best practices, published algorithms, and complications extending beyond CLABSI and phlebitis to assist clinicians in navigating complex vascular access decisions.

Antimicrobial Agents and Catheter Complications in Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy

OBJECTIVES

Debate about whether certain antimicrobial agents traditionally considered vesicants increase the risk of catheter complications has led to uncertainty in venous catheter placement protocols. To understand whether patients requiring home-based outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) should receive peripheral catheters (e.g., midline catheters) versus central venous catheters, and to understand whether certain antimicrobial agents place home-based OPAT patients at higher risk for catheter complications, we investigated associations between antimicrobial agent(s) and catheter complications.

METHODS

We performed a prospective cohort study of patients requiring home-based OPAT discharged from two urban tertiary care academic medical centers, including telephone surveys and chart abstractions. Multivariable Poisson regressions were used to evaluate: (i) associations between antimicrobial agents traditionally considered vesicants, based on pH or osmolarity, and catheter complication rates, and (ii) associations between antimicrobial agent and rates of catheter complications.

RESULTS

Vesicant antimicrobials defined using pH or osmolarity criteria were not associated with an increased rate of catheter complications (adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR]: 1.63, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89-2.96). Vancomycin was associated with an increased rate of catheter complications, as was daptomycin (aIRR: 2.32 [95% CI: 1.20-4.46] and 4.45 [95% CI: 1.02-19.41], respectively). Staphylococcus aureus infections were also associated with an increased rate of catheter complications (aIRR: 2.13, 95% CI: 1.09-4.19), as were midline catheters (aIRR: 9.44, 95% CI: 2.12-41.97).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study supports recent guidance identifying vancomycin as a vesicant, among a subset of antimicrobial agents, and removal of pH criteria for identification of vesicants.

The incidence of symptomatic upper limb venous thrombosis associated with midline catheter: Prospective observation

Aim:

The evaluation of the incidence of symptomatic upper limb venous thrombosis (ULVT) associated with midline catheters in patients admitted to the hospital.

Methods:

The frequency of symptomatic ULVT diagnosed in a group of patients with midline catheters confirmed by sonographic examination in hospitalised patients at Faculty Hospital over the period of 1 year.

Results:

Four hundred thirty-nine midline catheters were inserted in 430 patients (250 women and 180 men) during year 2015. Nine patients had two midline catheters. The average age of the patient was 68 years (range: 19–96 years). The median time of midline catheter introduction into a vein was 10 days (range: 1–112 days). Symptomatic thrombosis was diagnosed in 20 patients (4.5%), 3.3/1000 catheter days. It was associated with gender (male) and midline insertion in the cephalic vein.

Conclusion:

The risk of upper limb symptomatic thrombosis associated with midline catheters during a stay in the hospital should be taken into consideration when indicating optimal venous access.

Observational Study of Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Outcomes in Adult Hospitalized Patients: A Multivariable Analysis of Peripheral Intravenous Catheter Failure

BACKGROUND

Almost 70% of hospitalized patients require a peripheral intravenous catheter (PIV), yet up to 69% of PIVs fail prior to completion of therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To identify risk factors associated with PIV failure.

DESIGN

A single center, prospective, cohort study.

SETTING

Medical and surgical wards of a tertiary hospital located in Queensland, Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients requiring a PIV.

MEASUREMENTS

Demographic, clinical, and potential PIV risk factors were collected. Failure occurred if the catheter had complications at removal.

RESULTS

We recruited 1000 patients. Catheter failure occurred in 512 (32%) of 1578 PIVs. Occlusion/infiltration risk factors included intravenous (IV) flucloxacillin (hazard ratio [HR], 1.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19-3.31), 22-gauge PIVs (HR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.02-2.00), and female patients (HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.10-2.00). Phlebitis was associated with female patients (HR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.40-2.35), bruised insertion sites (HR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.26-3.71), IV flucloxacillin (HR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.26-3.21), and dominant side insertion (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.09-1.77). Dislodgement risks were a paramedic insertion (HR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.03-3.06).Each increase by 1 in the average number of daily PIV accesses was associated (HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.03-1.20)-(HR 1.14, 95% CI 1.08-1.21) with occlusion/infiltration, phlebitis and dislodgement. Additional securement products were associated with less (HR 0.32, 95% C-0.46)-(HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.48-0.82) occlusion/infiltration, phlebitis and dislodgement.

CONCLUSION

Modifiable risk factors should inform education and inserter skill development to reduce the currently high rate of PIV failure.

Development of an Evidence-Based List of Noncytotoxic Vesicant Medications and Solutions

Infiltration of a vesicant medication, defined as extravasation, may result in significant patient injuries. The first step in preventing extravasation is the identification and recognition of vesicant medications and solutions. Because there is no list of noncytotoxic vesicants as established by a professional organization, the Infusion Nurses Society, as the global authority in infusion nursing, identified the need to address this gap. A task force was formed for the purpose of creating an evidence-based list of noncytotoxic vesicant medications and solutions.

[Patient safety in antibiotics administration: Risk assessment]

OBJECTIVE

To determine the level of risk in the preparation and administration of antibiotics frequently used in the Intensive Care Unit using a risk matrix.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

A study was conducted using situation analysis and literature review of databases, protocols and good practice guidelines on intravenous therapy, drugs, and their administration routes. The most used antibiotics in the ICU registered in the ENVIN-HELICS program from 1 April to 30 June 2015 were selected. In this period, 257 patients received antimicrobial treatment and 26 antibiotics were evaluated. Variables studied: A risk assessment of each antibiotic using the scale Risk Assessment Tool, of the National Patient Safety Agency, as well as pH, osmolarity, type of catheter recommended for administration, and compatibility and incompatibility with other antibiotics studied.

RESULTS

Almost two-thirds (65.3%) of antibiotics had more than 3 risk factors (represented by a yellow stripe), with the remaining 34.7% of antibiotics having between 0 and 2 risk factors (represented by a green stripe). There were no antibiotics with 6 or more risk factors (represented by a red stripe). Most drugs needed reconstitution, additional dilution, and the use of part of the vial to administer the prescribed dose.

CONCLUSION

More than half of the antibiotics studied had a moderate risk level; thus measures should be adopted in order to reduce it. The risk matrix is a useful tool for the assessment and detection of weaknesses associated with the preparation and administration of intravenous antibiotics.

Vancomycin Administration Through a Novel Midline Catheter: Summary of a 5-Year, 1086-Patient Experience in an Urban Community Hospital

Background: The 2016 Infusion Therapy Standards of Practice no longer require that low pH (&lt;5) medications be administered via central venous access devices. Nevertheless, the practice of placing PICCs for vancomycin administration often persists.

Purpose: To demonstrate the safety and efficacy of intravenous vancomycin administration through a short and long term midline catheter.

Methodology: A retrospective chart review was performed on 1086 patients who received intravenous vancomycin through a midline catheter.

Results: There were no catheter-associated bloodstream infections and no deep vein thromboses. Phlebitis occurred rarely (0.6%), as did benign infiltrations (1.2%). There were no extravasation injuries.

Conclusions: These outcomes summarize more than 5 years of experience administering intravenous vancomycin (4 mg/mL) safely and cost-efficiently through a nontrimmable midline catheter.

In-line pressure monitoring in IV infusions: benefits for patients and nurses

Intravenous (IV) infusions are an essential part of hospital patient care, but occlusions in peripheral cannulae are common. One of the most dangerous consequences of occlusion (blockage) is extravasation-the non-intentional leakage of infused vesicant fluid into the tissue surrounding the vein-as it can lead to long-term, or even permanent, tissue damage. Adults and children are affected, with preterm neonates being particularly vulnerable. In-line pressure monitoring (ILPM) can help identify occlusions early and help prevent complications such as extravasation and infiltration. Occlusions cause a rise in pressure in the IV line, so IV pumps fitted with ILPM are able to detect this rise in pressure early and sound an alarm, allowing the user to take corrective measures before the patient suffers any serious chemical damage. ILPM also helps prevent or minimise other consequences of in-line occlusions such as suboptimal medicine dosing, patient distress, and economic costs to NHS trusts.

Fatores relacionados à flebite em idosos com infusão intravenosa de amiodarona

Resumo Objetivo Identificar fatores associados à ocorrência de flebite decorrente da infusão intravenosa periférica de amiodarona em idosos. Métodos Coorte prospectiva, observacional sobre fatores de risco para ocorrência de flebite em pacientes com idade acima de 60 anos que receberam infusão intravenosa periférica de amiodarona, internados, no ano de 2012, nas unidades Coronarianas (22 leitos) e Semi Intensivas Gerais (43 leitos) de um hospital privado de grande porte, localizado na cidade de São Paulo, Brasil. Resultados Do total de 102 idosos, 34 (33,3%) apresentaram flebite. A flebite foi mais frequente em mulheres (43,6%), em membro dominante puncionado (36,2%), em veias basílica ou cefálica do antebraço (41,2%), nos dispositivos de calibre 20G (40,0%), em curativo estéril IV Fix® (39,3%), em cateter Intima® (34,3%) e quando houve reposicionamento do dispositivo (33,3%); mas essas variáveis não se associaram estatisticamente à flebite. Ausência de flebite na infusão rápida exclusiva foi marginalmente significante (p= 0,051) comparada aos diferentes tipos de infusão. Conclusão Um terço dos idosos estudados apresentou flebite, verificou-se ausência de flebite somente nas infusões rápidas exclusivas.

How to Establish an Effective Midline Program: A Case Study of 2 Hospitals

Introduction: Establishing an effective midline program involves more than simply learning an insertion technique for a new product. Midline catheters provide a reliable vascular access option for those patients with difficult venous access who would otherwise require multiple venipunctures or the use of higher-risk central lines to maintain access. An effective midline program establishes a protocol for device selection and includes standing orders to facilitate speed to placement.

Methods: Our retrospective descriptive review evaluated the successful integration of midline programs into existing vascular access bedside insertion programs in 2 acute care hospitals. The investigator reviewed a convenience sample of hospital patients. Participants in the study included vascular access team managers and team members from the sample sites.

Results: The results of this 2-hospital study demonstrate successful integration of a midline program into a bedside insertion program with 0 midline-related infections since initiation. Documentation of overall central line-associated bloodstream infection rates for hospital 1 changed from 1.7/1000 catheter-days to 0.2/1000 catheter-days, reflecting a 78% reduction in infections and a projected cost avoidance of $531,570 annually. Both hospitals demonstrated reduced rates of infection following implementation of a midline program.

Conclusions: Midlines have a history of lower risk for both infection and thrombosis compared with central venous devices. Although more research is needed on the more recently developed midline catheters, available evidence suggests that midlines provide a safe and reliable form of vascular access, reducing costs and the risk of infection associated with central venous catheters, especially those placed solely for patients with difficult venous access.