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

Non-Adherence to Peripheral Venous Catheter Care Protocols Significantly Decreases Patient Safety and Impacts Costs: A Retrospective Observational Study

In the healthcare field, the effective implementation of clinical protocols is crucial to ensuring patient safety and well-being. In this context, this study evaluates nurses' adherence to the maintenance and replacement protocol of peripheral venous catheters (PVCs) in a university hospital in Spain, examining the impact of compliance with the protocol on the loss of PVCs and on patient safety in addition to analyzing the related costs. A retrospective observational study was conducted with 590 patients who were admitted in 2018 and 2019. The chi-square test or Fisher's exact test, as appropriate, was used to see the association between the study variables; with the dependent variable being the loss of PVCs (including, as a dependent variable, the loss of PVCs before 48 h). The patients' electronic and physical medical records were reviewed to analyze nursing interventions related to the management of PVCs. A total of 24% of patients experienced PVC loss within the first 24 h after insertion. Failure to comply with the protocol resulted in 80% more catheter loss and increased the cost of cannulation by 46.84%. Low compliance with PVC care protocols significantly increases the risk of catheter loss, suggesting the need for increased training and strict protocol implementation. The findings emphasize the critical role of nursing in ensuring patient safety through adherence to evidence-based protocols. Continuing education and diligent protocol implementation are essential to reducing healthcare costs and improving patient outcomes.

Effectiveness and Safety of Measures to Prevent Infections and Other Complications Associated With Peripheral Intravenous Catheters: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) contribute substantially to the global burden of infections. This systematic review assessed 24 infection prevention and control (IPC) interventions to prevent PIVC-associated infections and other complications.

METHODS

We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, WHO Global Index Medicus, CINAHL, and reference lists for controlled studies from 1 January 1980-16 March 2023. We dually selected studies, assessed risk of bias, extracted data, and rated the certainty of evidence (COE). For outcomes with 3 or more trials, we conducted Bayesian random-effects meta-analyses.

RESULTS

105 studies met our prespecified eligibility criteria, addressing 16 of the 24 research questions; no studies were identified for 8 research questions. Based on findings of low to high COE, wearing gloves reduced the risk of overall adverse events related to insertion compared with no gloves (1 non-randomized controlled trial [non-RCT]; adjusted risk ratio [RR], .52; 95% CI, .33-.85), and catheter removal based on defined schedules potentially resulted in a lower phlebitis/thrombophlebitis incidence (10 RCTs; RR, 0.74, 95% credible interval, .49-1.01) compared with clinically indicated removal in adults. In neonates, chlorhexidine reduced the phlebitis score compared with non-chlorhexidine-containing disinfection (1 RCT; 0.14 vs 0.68; P = .003). No statistically significant differences were found for other measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite their frequent use and concern about PIVC-associated complications, this review underscores the urgent need for more high-quality studies on effective IPC methods regarding safe PIVC management. In the absence of valid evidence, adherence to standard precaution measures and documentation remain the most important principles to curb PIVC complications.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

The protocol was registered in the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/exdb4).

Peripheral vascular catheter use in Latin America (the vascular study): A multinational cross-sectional study

Background

Peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) insertion is one of the most common clinical procedures worldwide, yet little data are available from Latin America. Our aim was to describe processes and practices regarding PIVC use in hospitalized patients related to hospital guidelines, characteristics of PIVC inserters, prevalence of PIVC complications, and idle PIVCs.

Methods

In 2019 we conducted a multinational, cross-sectional study of adult and pediatric patients with a PIVC in hospitals from five Latin American countries: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, and Mexico. We used two data collection tools to collect hospital guidelines and patient-specific data on the day of the study. The vessel health and preservation (VHP) model guided synthesis of the study aims/questions and suggested opportunities for improvement.

Results

A total of 9,620 PIVCs in adult (86%) and pediatric inpatients in 132 hospitals were assessed. Routine replacement 8-72 hourly was recommended for adults in 22% of hospitals, rather than evidence-based clinical assessment-based durations, and 69% of hospitals allowed the use of non-sterile tape rather than the international standard of a sterile dressing. The majority (52%) of PIVCs were inserted by registered nurses (RNs), followed by nursing assistants/technicians (41%). Eight percent of PIVCs had pain, hyperemia, or edema, 6% had blood in the extension tubing/connector, and 3% had dried blood around the device. Most PIVCs had been inserted for intravenous medications (81%) or fluids (59%) in the previous 24 h, but 9% were redundant.

Conclusion

Given the variation in policies, processes and practices across countries and participating hospitals, clinical guidelines should be available in languages other than English to support clinician skills and knowledge to improve PIVC safety and quality. Existing and successful vascular access societies should be encouraged to expand their reach and encourage other countries to join in multinational communities of practice.

Comparison of clinically indicated replacement and routine replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

It is unknown whether clinically indicated replacement of peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) increases the risks of PIVC-associated complications and infections compared to routine replacement of PIVCs.

Methods

We searched PubMed, the Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, Ovid MEDLINE, and Clinicaltrials.gov for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compare the safety outcomes of routine replacement and clinically indicated replacement of PIVCs were included for meta-analysis. The primary outcome was the incidence of phlebitis, and secondary outcomes included the risks of occlusion, local infection, infiltration, catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI), and accidental removal of the PIVC.

Results

A total of 9 RCTs involving 10 973 patients were included in this meta-analysis, of whom 5,546 and 5,527 were assigned to the study group (clinically indicated replacement of PIVCs) and control group (routine replacement of PIVCs every 72–96 h), respectively. The incidence of phlebitis in the study group was significantly higher than that in the control group [risk ratio (RR), 1.20; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.01–1.44, P = 0.04, I² = 49%]. In addition, the study group was associated with a higher risk of occlusion (RR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.08–1.95, P = 0.01, I² = 82%) and infiltration (fluid leaks) (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.06–1.53, P = 0.01, I² = 72%) than the control group. However, no significant differences were observed in the risks of local infection (RR, 1.75; 95% CI, 0.38–8.16, P = 0.48, I² = 0%) and CRBSI (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.08–4.68, P = 0.64, I² = 0%) between the study and control groups.

Conclusion

The clinically indicated replacement of PIVCs may increase the risks of PIVC-associated phlebitis, infiltration, and occlusion compared to the routine replacement of PIVCs, but did not increase the risk of PIVC-associated infections. Based on these findings, routine replacement of PIVCs every 72–96 h maybe a preferred option than clinically indicated replacement of PIVCs.

Systematic review registration

[www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/], identifier [CRD42022302021].