English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objectives: The present study was undertaken to compare the pain of peripheral IV cannulation (IVC) using a 20-G peripheral biomaterial PEU-Vialon cannula or the 20-G compound FEP-Teflon cannula widely used in clinical practice. Methods: A prospective, randomized, single-blinded, controlled trial was undertaken at the ED of University Hospital. Eighty-nine noncritically ill adult patients who were receiving an IV line as part of their care were enrolled. In each case cannulas were applicated to the antecubital area. Participants rated their pain on a visual analog scale (VAS). The primary outcome was patients pain score, and the secondary outcome was the provider’s perception of safety and satisfaction. Results: The two treatment groups did not differ in age, gender or cannulation indication (p>0.05). Mean VAS was 2.80 for PEU and 3.56 for FEP (p=0.061). Mean provider safety scores were 4.84 (4 to 5) in the PEU group and 4.00 (2 to 5) in the FEP group (p=0.0001). Mean provider satisfaction of application scores were 4.65 in the PEU group and 4.56 in the FEP group (p>0.05). Conclusions: Althogh provider safety perception is high, perception of pain has not reduced when inserting PEU-Vialon cannula compared with compound of FEP

The Effect Of Cannula Material On The Pain Of Peripheral Intravenous Cannulation In The ED: A Prospective, Randomized Controlled Study