Vessel Health and Preservation: a model and clinical pathway for using vascular access devices

Cost effectiveness of a vascular access education and training program for hospitalized emergency department patients

OBJECTIVE

Education and training in vascular access is a critical component to delivering quality vascular access care. Given that organizations must invest resources to implement and sustain high-quality vascular access programming, we aimed to demonstrate the cost effectiveness of a program (Operation STICK (OSTICK)) in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

This was an observational cohort study conducted at a tertiary care academic center with 120,000 ED visits. Consecutive hospitalized adults with ultrasound-guided (DIVA) and traditionally-placed (non-DIVA) peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVC) in the ED were included in the analysis. Two groups (OSTICK and non-OSTICK) were compared in the analysis: OSTICK PIVCs were inserted by clinicians with formal, standardized training in peripheral venous access while non-OSTICK PIVCs were inserted by staff with basic departmental training in PIVC care. Cost factors included number of procedures, wait time to establish a PIVC, complications, and training. Effect was complication-free PIVC functionality. Multiple linear regressions were used to estimate incremental cost (ΔC), incremental effect (ΔE), and incremental net benefit (INB) of the OSTICK program.

RESULTS

From 10/1/2022 thru 3/31/2023, 21,259 PIVCs including 1681 OSTICK and 19,578 non-OSTICK PIVCs were included in the analysis. Average age was 64.8 and 53.7% were female. The estimate of incremental cost (ΔC) for each patient was -$83.175 (95% CI: -$103.953 to -$62.398; p<0.001), indicating that the OSTICK group saves money compared to the non-OSTICK group. The OSTICK group is also more effective at increasing the proportion of catheter dwell time relative to hospital length of stay (ΔE), with an estimate of 0.037 (95% CI: 0.016 to 0.059; p<0.001), compared to those in the non-OSTICK group. The estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the OSTICK group compared with the non-OSTICK group was -$221.964 (95% CI: -$177.400 to -$381.716) per ten percentage points of PIVC dwell time to hospital length of stay increase.

CONCLUSIONS

Strategic investment in vascular access education and training can yield impressive financial returns while simultaneously enhancing vascular access outcomes. It is imperative for organizations to recognize the significant impact of such initiatives and prioritize the implementation of comprehensive programs.

Effects of ultrasound with an automatic vessel detection system using artificial intelligence on the selection of puncture points among ultrasound beginner clinical nurses

BACKGROUND

Ultrasound guidance increases the success rate of peripheral intravenous catheter placement. However, the longer time required to obtain ultrasound-guided access poses difficulties for ultrasound beginners. Notably, interpretation of ultrasonographic images is considered as one of the main reasons of difficulty in using ultrasound for catheter placement. Therefore, an automatic vessel detection system (AVDS) using artificial intelligence was developed. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of AVDS for ultrasound beginners in selecting puncture points and determine suitable users for this system.

METHODS

In this crossover experiment involving the use of ultrasound with and without AVDS, we enrolled 10 clinical nurses, including 5 with some experience in peripheral intravenous catheterization using ultrasound-aided methods (categorized as ultrasound beginners) and 5 with no experience in ultrasound and less experience in peripheral intravenous catheterization using conventional methods (categorized as inexperienced). These participants chose two puncture points (those with the largest and second largest diameter) as ideal in each forearm of a healthy volunteer. The results of this study were the time required for the selection of puncture points and the vein diameter of the selected points.

RESULTS

Among ultrasound beginners, the time required for puncture point selection in the right forearm second candidate vein with a small diameter (<3 mm) was significantly shorter when using ultrasound with AVDS than when using it without AVDS (mean, 87 vs 247 s). Among inexperienced nurses, no significant difference in the time required for all puncture point selections was found between the use of ultrasound with and without AVDS. In the vein diameter, significant difference was shown only in the absolute difference at left second candidate among inexperienced participants.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasonography beginners needed less time to select the puncture points in a small diameter vein using ultrasound with AVDS than without AVDS.

Determinants of the optimal selection of vascular access devices: A systematic review underpinned by the COM-B behavioural model

BACKGROUND

Optimal selection of vascular access devices is based on multiple factors and is the first strategy to reduce vascular access device-related complications. This process is dependent on behavioural and human factors. The COM-B (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation, Behaviour) model was used as a theoretical framework to organize the findings of this systematic review.

METHODS/AIMS

To synthesize the evidence on determinants shaping the optimal selection of vascular access devices, using the COM-B behavioural model as the theoretical framework.

DESIGN

Systematic review of studies which explore decision-making at the time of selecting vascular access devices.

DATA SOURCES

The Medline, Web of Science, Scopus and EbscoHost databases were interrogated to extract manuscripts published up to 31 December 2021, in English or Spanish.

RESULTS

Among 16 studies included in the review, 8/16 (50%) focused on physical capability, 8/16 (50%) psychological capability, 15/16 (94%) physical opportunity, 12/16 (75%) social opportunity, 1/16 (6%) reflective motivation and 0/16 (0%) automatic motivation. This distribution represents a large gap in terms of interpersonal and motivational influences and cultural and social environments. Specialist teams (teams created for the insertion or maintenance of vascular access devices) are core for the optimal selection of vascular access devices (75% physical capability, 62% psychological capability, 80% physical opportunity and 100% social opportunity).

CONCLUSION

Specialist teams predominantly lead all actions undertaken towards the optimal selection of vascular access devices. These actions primarily centre on assessing opportunity and capability, often overlooking motivational influences and social environments.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE

A more implementation-focused professional approach could decrease inequity among patients and complications associated with vascular access devices.

IMPACT

Optimal selection of vascular access devices is the primary strategy in mitigating complications associated with these devices. There is a significant disparity between interpersonal and motivational influences and the cultural and social environments. Furthermore, specialized teams play a pivotal role in facilitating the optimal selection of vascular access devices. The study can benefit institutions concerned about vascular access devices and their complications.

REPORTING METHOD

This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

No Patient or Public Contribution. WHAT DOES THIS ARTICLE CONTRIBUTE TO THE WIDER GLOBAL CLINICAL COMMUNITY?: Optimal selection of vascular devices remains a growing yet unresolved issue with costly clinical and patient experience impact. Interventions to improve the optimal selection of vascular devices have focused on training, education, algorithms and implementation of specialist vascular teams; alas, these approaches do not seem to have substantially addressed the problem. Specialist vascular teams should evolve and pivot towards leading the implementation of quality improvement interventions, optimizing resource use and enhancing their role.

Operation STICK: A vascular access specialty program for the generalist emergency medicine clinician

OBJECTIVE

Comprehensive education and training programs are urgently needed to improve vascular access outcomes in the emergency department (ED). This study aimed to demonstrate the success of a formalized vascular access program in developing competent ED clinicians in traditional and ultrasound-guided insertion methods.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study exploring the success of trainees in obtaining competency in peripheral vascular access at an academic suburban ED with 120,000 annual visits. Eligible participants included healthcare workers that enrolled in the Operation STICK vascular access program and perform vascular access procedures as an aspect of their clinical practice. Competency in vascular access included both traditional and ultrasound-guided (US) peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) insertions. Competency was defined as demonstration of successful insertion of one traditional and one US PIVC in compliance with checklist. The primary objective was competency. Secondary objectives included trainee time to competency, trainee number of line encounters, and changes in program competency achievements over time.

RESULTS

From October 15, 2021, to April 15, 2023, 141 clinicians participated in peripheral vascular access training via the Operation STICK model, which included 72 (51.1%) nurses, 52 (36.9%) ED technicians, and 17 (12.0%) healthcare personnel with other medical training. Clinicians overall reported an average of 5.6 years of experience inserting peripheral intravenous catheters (PIVCs) and 23 (16.3%) had experience with using ultrasound. About 122 (86.5%) clinicians successfully completed the program and demonstrated competency in traditional and ultrasound-guided techniques. Time to competency varied over time, with a median of 124 days in the early phase, 32.5 days middle phase, and 10.6 h over 9.5 days in the later phase of the program (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Achieving competency in PIVC insertion necessitates a focused effort on refining and systematizing education and training approaches. Recognizing the inherent challenges present in ED settings, it is feasible to effectively and efficiently train emergency clinicians to be expert in both basic and advanced PIVC placement techniques through participation in a well-organized vascular access training program.

A scoping review of Clinical Studies, Hospital Group Reports and National Strategic Documents on vascular access devices in cancer patients

INTRODUCTION

The extent of vascular/venous access device (VAD) research output from the Island of Ireland is unknown. The identification of the papers available is important to create a future research agenda.

OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this study is to answer three questions: What is the number and descriptive quality of reported Vascular Access Device literature from the Island of Ireland? Is the reporting of Catheter Related Infection rates for cancer patients common in Irish Hospital Groups, National Cancer Reports and Publication Outputs? What are the implications for future research in this area?

METHODS

We used a scoping review and searched selected databases, grey literature and hospital regulatory bodies websites following the Joanna Briggs Institute Guidelines 2017. A data charting form was developed based on a template from the Joanna Briggs Institute and this was used to extract data from the included reports.

RESULTS

A total of 660 reports were screened. Sixty-one full text articles were reviewed from which 20 reports were included for data extraction. Of the reports included the following designs were used: nine retrospective study designs, four guidelines, two prospective study designs, two literature reviews and one of the following; survey, case study and cross sectional analysis designs. We did not identify any randomised controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analysis, meta-synthesis and scoping reviews. Five studies included catheter related infection rates. Gaps in the research include the collection of data sets and the need to establish a VAD registry; develop core outcomes for VADs; assessment and evaluation of VAD care bundles among cancer patients; and, the inclusion of public and patient involvement in future VAD research.

CONCLUSION

The reporting of VAD outcomes in published literature regarding cancer patients receiving treatment in Ireland is inconsistent and varied with no interventional studies addressing vascular access complications in cancer care.

International Consensus Recommendation Guidelines for Subcutaneous Infusions of Hydration and Medication in Adults: An e-Delphi Consensus Study

Infusion of fluids and medications is traditionally performed intravenously. However, venous depletion in patients has led to the quest for vessel health preservation. A safe, effective, acceptable, and efficient alternative is the subcutaneous route. A lack of organizational policies may contribute to the slow uptake of this practice. This modified e-Delphi (electronic) study aimed to derive international consensus on practice recommendations for subcutaneous infusions of fluids and medications. A panel of 11 international clinicians, with expertise in subcutaneous infusion research and/or clinical practice, rated and edited subcutaneous infusion practice recommendations from evidence, clinical practice guidelines, and clinical expertise within an Assessment, Best Practice, and Competency (ABC) domain guideline model. The ABC Model for Subcutaneous Infusion Therapy provides a systematic guideline of 42 practice recommendations for the safe delivery of subcutaneous infusions of fluids and medications in the adult population in all care settings. These consensus recommendations provide a guideline for health care providers, organizations, and policy makers to optimize use of the subcutaneous access route.

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.

Vascular access teams: a global outlook on challenges, benefits, opportunities, and future perspectives

BACKGROUND

Specialized vascular access training for medical professionals organized into vascular access teams (VATs) was shown to improve patient outcomes, clinical efficiency, and cost savings. Professional perspectives on VAT benefits, organization, challenges, and opportunities on a global scale remain inadequately explored. Using detailed perspectives, in this study, we explored the global VAT landscape, including challenges faced, clinical and clinico-economic impacts of VATs, with emphasis on underresearched facets of VAT initiation, data dissemination, and metrics or benchmarks for VAT success.

METHODS

Semistructured in-depth interviews of 14 VAT professionals from 9 countries and 5 continents were used to elicit qualitative and quantitative information.

RESULTS

Catheter insertions (100%) and training (86%) were the most performed VAT functions. Based on a 1-7 scale evaluating observed impacts of VATs, patient satisfaction (6.5) and institutional costs (6.2) were ranked the highest. VAT co-initiatives, advanced technology utilization (6.6), and ongoing member training (6.3) distinctly impacted VAT endeavors. Most institutions (64%) did not have routine mechanisms for recording VAT-related data; however, all participants (100%) stated the importance of sharing data to demonstrate VAT impacts. Time constraints (57%) emerged as one of the major deterrents to data collection or dissemination. The majority (64%) experienced an increased demand or workload for VAT services during the COVID-19 pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the global variances in VATs and gaps in VAT-related data, all participants unanimously endorsed the benefits of VAT programs. Evaluating the impact of VATs, disseminating VAT-related data, and forging specialized institutional partnerships for data sharing and training are potential strategies to tackle the hurdles surrounding VAT formation and sustenance.

Catheter failure in the administration of hyperosmotic drugs through a peripheral vein and vascular selection: A retrospective cohort study

This study aimed to determine whether the placement of a peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) in the cephalic vein of the forearm could prevent PIVC failure in patients receiving hyperosmotic drugs through the peripheral vein. This retrospective cohort study included patients aged ≥ 20 years who had received infusion therapy via a PIVC in our institution between July and November 2017. Patients were divided into groups according to PIVC insertion into the cephalic, basilic, and medial veins. PIVCs used to administer drugs with osmotic pressure ratios > 2.0 were included. The primary outcome was survival time to catheter failure. Catheter failure was defined as accidental and unplanned catheter removal. We set the cephalic vein and other veins, including the medial and basilic veins, in the forearm as cohort groups. We used the Kaplan-Meier survival curves to compare the time until catheter failure in the cohort groups. The Cox proportional hazard models were fitted, and the hazard ratios were calculated. A total of 46 catheters with hyperosmotic agents were included in the analysis. Catheter failure was observed in 25 (54.3%) cases. Time to catheter failure in patients receiving high-dose drugs via the cephalic vein was significantly longer than that in the other two groups (p < 0.01). Thus, the cephalic vein, which has a high blood flow, is the ideal site of PIVC insertion in patients receiving high drug concentrations to prevent catheter failure.

Vascular access care in patients with multimorbidity

BACKGROUND

More than half of patients with multimorbidity require intravenous therapy during their hospital stay. The aims of this study are to describe difficult intravenous access (DIVA) and vascular access care provided to this patient population and to explore the differences between easy and DIVA groups.

METHODS

A cohort study was conducted in patients with multimorbidity admitted to 2 hospitals between March and November 2013. The variables used to describe vascular care included choice and placement of devices, catheter swell time, and occurrence of adverse events. The incidence of adverse events was expressed as number cases per 1000 catheter days and χ², Student's t, or Mann-Whitney U tests were used to compare the care provided between both groups. Odds rates were calculated to determine the risk of complications associated with DIVA.

RESULTS

We recruited 135 patients, of whom 34.8% were women. Overall, 59.3% had DIVA. A total of 224 catheters were inserted, patients with difficult access requiring a mean of 1.71 catheters and those with easy access 1.58 catheters. Two or more attempts were required to place catheters in 23% of cases in the difficult access group versus 2.50% in the easy access group. Mean catheter dwell time was 3.84 days and 3.99 days, and the adverse event rate was 111/1000 and 83.6/1000 catheter days, respectively. The odds ratio for complications was 1.596.

CONCLUSIONS

Multimorbid patients with DIVA have a higher rate of complications as well as requiring more catheters and more placement attempts.

Beyond Bean Counting: Gathering and Using Data to Drive Improvements

Data collection of process and outcome measures for vascular access procedures and devices is recommended in all relevant guidelines and standards. A variety of strategies for achieving these objectives and how the findings can be aggregated and presented to improve patient care is discussed, along with a review of specific recommendations.

Current practice in dialysis central venous catheter management: Multi-disciplinary renal team perspectives

AIM

To explore the current practices related to the insertion, management and removal of dialysis central venous catheters (CVCs) used in patients with chronic kidney disease requiring haemodialysis.

METHODS

This qualitative descriptive study involved semi-structured interviews with surgeons, interventional radiologists, renal physicians, dialysis nurses, renal access nurses and renal researchers involved in the care of patients with chronic kidney disease requiring haemodialysis. Data were collected from staff at eight hospitals in six states and territories of Australia. Thirty-eight face-to-face interviews were conducted. A modified five-step qualitative content analysis approach was used to analyse the data.

RESULTS

Improved visualization technology and its use by interventional radiologists has steered insertions to specialist teams in specialist locations. This is thought to have decreased risk and improved patient outcomes. Nurses were identified as the professional group responsible for maintaining catheter access integrity, preventing access failure and reducing access-related complications. While best practice was considered important, justifications for variations in practice related to local patient and environment challenges were identified.

CONCLUSION

The interdisciplinary team is central in the insertion, maintenance, removal and education of patients regarding dialysis CVCs. Clinicians temper research-based decision-making about central dialysis access catheter management with knowledge of individual, environmental and patient factors. Strategies to ensure guidelines are appropriately translated for use in a wide variety of settings are necessary for patient safety.

Derivation of a clinical decision-making aid to improve the insertion of clinically indicated peripheral intravenous catheters and promote vessel health preservation. An observational study

Background

It is well established that the idle peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) provides no therapeutic value and is a clinical, economic and above all, patient concern. This study aimed to develop a decision aid to assist with clinical decision making to promote clinically indicated peripheral intravenous catheter (CIPIVC) insertion in the emergency department (ED) setting. Providing evidence for a uniform process could assist clinicians in a decision-making process for PIVC insertion. This could enable patients receive appropriate vascular access healthcare.

Methods

We performed a secondary analysis of data from a multicentre cohort of emergency department clinicians who performed PIVC insertion. We defined CIPIVC a priori as one used for a specific clinical treatment and or procedure such as prescribed intravenous (IV) fluids; prescribed IV medication; or IV contrast (for computerized tomography scans). We sought to refute or validate an assumption if the clinician performing or requesting the insertion decided the patient was >80% likely to need a PIVC. Using logistic regression, we derived a decision aid for CIPIVCs.

Results

In 817 patients undergoing PIVC insertion, we observed 68% of these to be CIPIVCs. Admitted patients were significantly more likely to have a CIPIVC, Odds Ratio (OR) = 3.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.17–4.30, p = <0.0001. Before insertion, patients who definitely needed IV fluids/medicines OR = 3.30, 95% CI = 2.02–5.39, p = <0.0001 and who definitely needed a contrast scan OR = 3.04, 95% CI = 1.15–8.03, p = 0.0250 were significantly more likely to have a device inserted for a clinical indication. Patients who presented with an existing vascular access device were more likely to have a new CIPIVC inserted for use OR = 4.35, 95% CI = 1.58–11.95, p = 0.0043. The clinician’s pre-procedural judgment of the likelihood of therapeutic use >80% was independently associated with CIPIVC; OR 3.16, 95% CI = 2.06–4.87, p<0.0001. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.81, and at the best cut-off, the model had a specificity of 0.81, sensitivity of 0.71, a positive predictive value of 0.89 and negative predictive value of 0.57.

Conclusions

Using the derived decision aid, clinicians could ask:- “Does this patient need A-PIVC?” Clinicians can decide to insert a CIPIVCs when: (i) Admission to hospital is anticipated and when (ii) a Procedure requires a PIVC, e.g., computerised tomography scans and where an existing suitable vascular access device is not present and or; (iii) there is an indication for IV fluids and or medicines that cannot be tolerated enterally and are suitable for dilution in peripheral veins; and, (iv) the Clinician’s perceived likelihood of use is greater than 80%.