RESUMO
Background: Venous access devices (VADs) play a vital role within the neonatal intensive care unit. However, there are significant risks associated with the use of VADs, with complications such as infection, thrombosis, device occlusion, and infiltration/extravasation frequently contributing to device-related failures and increasing the risk of significant patient harm or injury. This study aimed to explore the relationships between risk factors and different venous access device complications in the neonatal setting, and then use that evidence to develop an algorithm based on observational data. Methods: This is a retrospective, single-center cohort study that was conducted in a large 112-bed neonatal intensive care unit in Qatar. We examined venous access device data from January 2016 to December 2018 for all term and preterm neonates. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the outcomes, which included a mean and its standard deviation or median and an interquartile range for continuous variables regarding normal distribution, and absolute numbers with percentages for discrete variables. Results: The authors recorded a total of 23,858 VADs inserted during the study period. Of these, 21,313 (89%) were peripheral intravenous catheters, 689 (3%) were extended dwell-peripheral intravenous catheters, 1,335 (6%) were epicutaneo-caval catheters, and 521 (2%) were umbilical venous catheters. In total, 51,179 catheter days were registered, with 2.17 catheter days reported per patient. Peripheral device dwell times were significantly shorter when compared with central venous catheter devices (P < 0.001), with mean dwell times of 22 days ± 23â h and 236 days ± 183â h, respectively. After insertion, a complication occurred in 11,177 (51%) of peripheral VADs and 221 (12%) of central VADs. The type of device inserted [P < 0.001, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.50-0.54], reason/indication for intravenous therapy (P < 0.001, HR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.82-0.87), and the side of insertion of the device (P < 0.001, HR = 1.25, 95% CI: 1.24-1.27) had a significant relationship with outcomes. Conclusions: Four subgroups of VADs were identified (peripheral intravenous catheters, extended dwell-peripheral intravenous devices, epicutaneo-caval catheters, and umbilical venous catheters) with outcome-related differences. Central venous access devices (epicutaneo-caval catheters and umbilical venous catheters) had lower complications compared with peripheral VADs. Proper venous access device selection, early insertion, and early removal approaches remain crucial to preventing venous access device complications. Peripheral intravenous devices should be used carefully and closely watched for early detection of complications.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Until the 1980s, central vascular access in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit was predominantly delivered by umbilical catheters and only and if needed by surgical cutdowns or subclavian vein catheterization through blind percutaneous venipuncture. In the early 1980s, epicutaneo-caval catheters were successfully introduced. METHODS: In our Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, a dedicated team to insert epicutaneo-caval catheters was formally established in January 2017, including 12 neonatologists and 1 neonatal nurse practitioner. A before- versus after-intervention study was designed to determine whether the establishment of the epicutaneo-caval catheter insertion team is associated with increased success rates and a decreased risk of catheter-related complications. Success rates and other catheter-related parameters were traced from 2016 onward. Collected data were analyzed for three consecutive years: 2016, 2017, and 2018. RESULTS: The epicutaneo-caval catheter team inserted 1336 catheters over 3 years. Both first prick (from 57.7% to 66.9%; p = 0.023) and overall success (from 81.7% to 97.6%; p < 0.0001) rates significantly improved. In 2018, the number of tunneled or surgically inserted central venous catheters came down to zero (p < 0.0001). Overall catheter-related complications were significantly lower following the epicutaneo-caval catheter team's establishment (p < 0.0001) while there was no significant decrease noted (p = 0.978) in central line-associated bacterial stream infection rates. CONCLUSION: A dedicated epicutaneo-caval catheter team is a promising intervention to increase success rates and significantly decrease catheter-related complications in Neonatal Intensive Care Unit. Standardizing epicutaneo-caval catheter placement is important; however, standardizing catheter maintenance seems essential to the improvement of central line-associated bacterial stream infection rates.