Effectiveness of vialon biomaterial versus teflon catheters for peripheral intravenous placement: A randomized clinical trial

Examining the effect of training with a teaching for understanding framework on intravenous therapy administration's knowledge, performance, and satisfaction of nursing students: a non-randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Nursing students require improvement in their intravenous infusion therapy management skills, yet traditional training models possess deficiencies. The Teaching for Understanding (TfU) Framework can enhance the teaching-learning process and support quality education. Therefore, utilizing TfU framework for training may promote the performance of nurses.

METHODS

Utilizing a non-synchronized design, 102 nurses were recruited using a convenience sampling method. Fifty-one student nurses from August 2019 to January 2021 were designated as the control group, and 51 student nurses from February 2021 to July 2022 were included as the intervention group. The control group received traditional teaching methods, while the intervention group was trained based on TfU framework. The impact was gauged through medical education environment perception, theory and practice assessments, and learning satisfaction surveys.

RESULTS

After the training, there was no significant difference between the control group and the intervention group in the theory assessment. However, the practice assessment scores of the intervention group were significantly higher than those of the control group. Compared with the control group, the learning satisfaction scores of the trained nurses in the intervention group were significantly higher, exhibiting significant differences, particularly in communication ability, teamwork cooperation, summing up capability, and interest in learning improvement. Furthermore, the scores of the learning perceptions, atmosphere, social self-perceptions, and total scores of the intervention group were significantly higher.

CONCLUSION

Training using TfU framework can heighten students' understanding and command over knowledge and skills, fuel their learning fervor, and enhance their communication and collaboration abilities. TfU framework should be disseminated in medical education to improve the quality of education.

A randomized controlled study to compare first stick success with Instaflash technology: The FIRSST study

BACKGROUND

Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) are frequently used in clinical settings for intravenous access. Multiple attempts of PIVC insertions leads to patient discomfort, delay in treatment, associated complications, and extensive expenditure cost. Reduced number of attempts causes patient/nursing personnel satisfaction and expenditure costs. The present study evaluated performance efficacy of BD Venflon™ I with Instaflash needle technology (investigational device) as compared to the BD Venflon™ without Instaflash needle technology (control device).

METHODOLOGY

The PIVC insertions were randomized in the ratio 1:1 using either investigational or control device and were monitored for first stick success rate, ease of insertion, and patient satisfaction. Data was analyzed using R 4.0.3 and Microsoft Excel. Chi square test was used to establish association between two categorical variables.

RESULTS

In total, 1402 patients were analyzed for first attempt insertion success which showed 98.72% success rate in investigational device as compared to 88.87% success rate in case of the control device (p = 0.0004). Marginal differences were observed in ease of insertion in investigational (98.71%) and control devices (99%) signifying high satisfaction levels of nursing personnels. Positive responses were observed in investigational (98.01%) and control devices (99%) underlining satisfactory performances of overall patient experiences.

CONCLUSION

The present study showed that BD Venflon™ I with Instaflash needle technology enhanced first attempt insertion success rate along with marginal differences in its efficacy in comparison with the BD Venflon™ without Instaflash needle technology thus enhancing patient and nursing personnel satisfaction in turn making it a better alternative to be used in hospitals.

Peripheral intravenous catheter material and design to reduce device failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients require vascular access for medical treatments, diagnostic procedures and symptom management. Current failure rates of peripheral intravascular catheters (PIVCs) are unacceptably high (40-50%). This systematic review aimed to determine the effect of different PIVC materials and designs on the incidence of PIVC failure.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in November 2022 using CINAHL, PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. Randomised controlled trials that compared PIVC novel PIVC material/design and standard material/design were included. The primary outcome was all causes of PIVC failure, any reason for device removal due to cessation of device function; and secondary outcomes included individual PIVC complications and infection (local or systemic), and dwell times. Quality appraisal was conducted using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. A meta-analysis was performed using random effects model.

RESULTS

Seven randomised controlled trials were eligible for inclusion. In meta-analysis, the impact of material and design on PIVC failure in the studies favoured the intervention arms (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.57-0.89), however there was substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 81%, 95% CI 61-91%). Through subgroup analyses, a significant difference on PIVC failure favoured the closed system over the open system (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.99; I2 = 23%, 95% CI 0-90%).

CONCLUSION

Catheter material and design can impact PIVC outcome. Conclusive recommendations are limited due to the small number of studies and inconsistent reporting of clinical outcomes. Further rigorous research of PIVC types is necessary to improve clinical practice and device selection pathways should reflect the resulting evidence.

Effect of peripheral intravenous catheter type and material on therapy failure in a neonatal population

BACKGROUND

In neonatal settings vascular access devices are essential for treatment. However, their use is not without risks. The design and materials of peripheral vascular access devices have been evaluated amongst adult populations, but contemporary studies in neonatal settings are scant.

PURPOSE/OUTCOME MEASURES

This research describes the prevalence of peripheral intravenous catheter failure related to three different catheter types with the intent to identify modifiable risks that might be used to evaluate device efficacy, innovate neonatal practice, and support future policy developments.

METHOD AND SETTING

This was a retrospective observational analysis of routinely collected anonymized intravenous therapy related data. The study was carried out at the tertiary neonatal intensive care unit (112 beds) of the Women's Wellness and Research Center of Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar.

PARTICIPANTS

Neonates who were admitted to the unit requiring intravenous treatment wherefore peripheral intravenous cannulation was indicated, were included in this study.

RESULTS

The use of different type of catheters resulted in significantly less therapy failures as phlebitis and increased dwell time, compared with the control groups. This remains significant after adjusting for age at insertion, gestational age, birth weight, and catheter type.

CONCLUSIONS

The study's findings are in accord with international literature concerning adult and pediatric patients concerning the superiority of PUR over PTFE catheters with respect to the risk of phlebitis and longer dwell times. However, the risk of failure of therapy did not differ between catheters. This finding is reassuring and supports practitioner judgment when selecting peripheral catheter devices.

Shape memory polyurethane potentially used for vascular stents with water-induced stiffening and improved hemocompatibility

We designed a shape memory polyurethane potentially used for vascular stents with water-induced stiffening in vivo and improved hemocompatibility.

Routine replacement versus replacement as clinical indicated of peripheral intravenous catheters: A multisite randomised controlled trial

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To compare the safety of replacing peripheral intravenous catheter as clinically indicated versus routine replacement on patient outcomes in the Chinese context.

BACKGROUND

Some evidence from developed countries recommend replacing peripheral intravenous catheter as clinically indicated; however, there is limited evidence from developing countries.

DESIGN

A multisite randomised controlled trial.

METHODS

The 3050 participants from three hospitals in China were randomly assigned to clinically indicated or routine replacement groups. Patients in the clinically indicated group had the catheters kept in situ until any of the following clinical signs appeared: phlebitis, infiltration, occlusion, displacement, local infection and diagnosed catheter-related bloodstream infection. Patients in the routine replacement group had their peripheral intravenous catheters replaced every 96 hours. The outcomes of phlebitis, infiltration, occlusion, displacement; catheter-related bloodstream infection, all-cause bloodstream infection, and local infection were compared. CONSORT checklist was used to guide the reporting of this RCT.

RESULTS

The risk of phlebitis, phlebitis per 1000 catheter days, occlusion, dislodgement, all bloodstream infections, local infection and mortality between the two groups were not significantly different. The risk of infiltration was increased in the clinically indicated group (HR 1.29). There was no catheter-related bloodstream infection reported in either group. Patients' first peripheral intravenous catheter dwelling time and cumulative indwelling time of all peripheral intravenous catheters in the clinically indicated group were significantly longer than the routine replacement group. There was no statistical significant difference in survival times from phlebitis between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In the Chinese context, removing peripheral catheters as clinical indicated did not increase the risk of phlebitis, occlusion, catheter displacement and catheter infection; however, there was an increased infiltration incidence.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

In developing countries, removing peripheral catheters as clinical indicated is feasible, but more frequent observations of infiltration are highly recommended.