Premium
Use of Short Peripheral Intravenous Catheters: Characteristics, Management, and Outcomes Worldwide
Author(s) -
Alexandrou Evan,
RayBarruel Gillian,
Carr Peter J.,
Frost Steven A.,
Inwood Sheila,
Higgins Niall,
Lin Frances,
Alberto Laura,
Mermel Leonard,
Rickard Claire M.
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
journal of hospital medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.128
H-Index - 65
eISSN - 1553-5606
pISSN - 1553-5592
DOI - 10.12788/jhm.3039
Subject(s) - medicine , primary care , emergency medicine , family medicine
BACKGROUND Peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) use in health care is common worldwide. Failure of PIVCs is also common, resulting in premature removal and replacement. OBJECTIVE To investigate the characteristics, management practices, and outcomes of PIVCs internationally. DESIGN Cross‐sectional study. SETTING/PATIENTS Hospitalized patients from rural, regional, and metropolitan areas internationally. MEASUREMENTS Hospital, device, and inserter characteristics were collected along with assessment of the catheter insertion site. PIVC use in different geographic regions was compared. RESULTS We reviewed 40,620 PIVCs in 51 countries. PIVCs were used primarily for intravenous medication ( n = 28,571, 70%) and predominantly inserted in general wards ( n = 22,167, 55%). Two‐thirds of all devices were placed in non‐recommended sites such as the hand, wrist, or antecubital veins. Nurses inserted most PIVCs ( n = 28,575, 71%); although there was wide regional variation (26% to 97%). The prevalence of idle PIVCs was 14% ( n = 5,796). Overall, 10% ( n = 4,204) of PIVCs were painful to the patient or otherwise symptomatic of phlebitis; a further 10% ( n = 3,879) had signs of PIVC malfunction; and 21% of PIVC dressings were suboptimal ( n = 8,507). Over one‐third of PIVCs ( n = 14,787, 36%) had no documented daily site assessment and half ( n = 19,768, 49%) had no documented date and time of insertion. CONCLUSIONS In this study, we found that many PIVCs were placed in areas of flexion, were symptomatic or idle, had suboptimal dressings, or lacked adequate documentation. This suggests inconsistency between recommended management guidelines for PIVCs and current practice.